IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [EToSat] What we are looking for from QUIC

Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net> Mon, 09 December 2019 18:04 UTC

Return-Path: <huitema@huitema.net>
X-Original-To: etosat@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: etosat@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D8AE120121 for <etosat@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Dec 2019 10:04:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GYce1eKTImsS for <etosat@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Dec 2019 10:04:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx43-out1.antispamcloud.com (mx43-out1.antispamcloud.com [138.201.61.189]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 073C612008F for <etosat@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Dec 2019 10:04:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from xse51.mail2web.com ([66.113.196.51] helo=xse.mail2web.com) by mx35.antispamcloud.com with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <huitema@huitema.net>) id 1ieNOi-00048k-Kw for etosat@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Dec 2019 19:04:42 +0100
Received: from xsmtp22.mail2web.com (unknown [10.100.68.61]) by xse.mail2web.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47WrgV0X4Mz1Px1 for <etosat@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Dec 2019 10:04:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.5.2.49] (helo=xmail11.myhosting.com) by xsmtp22.mail2web.com with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <huitema@huitema.net>) id 1ieNOf-0005Nx-UQ for etosat@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Dec 2019 10:04:37 -0800
Received: (qmail 9495 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2019 18:04:37 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO [192.168.200.64]) (Authenticated-user:_huitema@huitema.net@[72.235.197.82]) (envelope-sender <huitema@huitema.net>) by xmail11.myhosting.com (qmail-ldap-1.03) with ESMTPA for <etosat@ietf.org>; 9 Dec 2019 18:04:36 -0000
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail-CDF5970D-5E65-4CE9-B513-741BCB7DCF63"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2019 08:04:35 -1000
Message-Id: <5D6C8912-FF49-4C03-886B-C4509DA7EA16@huitema.net>
References: <SN6PR11MB308798A993C4C67CF898A4E5CE580@SN6PR11MB3087.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Cc: "Morten V. Pedersen" <morten@steinwurf.com>, "etosat@ietf.org" <etosat@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <SN6PR11MB308798A993C4C67CF898A4E5CE580@SN6PR11MB3087.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
To: "Su, Chi-Jiun" <Chi-Jiun.Su@hughes.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (17A878)
X-Originating-IP: 66.113.196.51
X-Spampanel-Domain: xsmtpout.mail2web.com
X-Spampanel-Username: 66.113.196.51/32
Authentication-Results: antispamcloud.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=66.113.196.51/32@xsmtpout.mail2web.com
X-Spampanel-Outgoing-Class: unsure
X-Spampanel-Outgoing-Evidence: Combined (0.14)
X-Recommended-Action: accept
X-Filter-ID: Mvzo4OR0dZXEDF/gcnlw0fi3oD8HEy9ysrsB6Ile+oipSDasLI4SayDByyq9LIhVuzQSEKO/O3ys sGwV9oPupETNWdUk1Ol2OGx3IfrIJKywOmJyM1qr8uRnWBrbSAGDYbC1vFNC/qFxauDStI0QV8RX qYbtEQV1z/L435ZRxFTLleXDkNO/+I/nR9ESHG2V+rYZvu7UEJiU3s27VgKHO7lwS3dBJTnTxDoD vBGGxpgwWbxrOZCJSMpTl/yE2fo2JEfuJ9gSFfTKKwEFu+5zXgZ6weYgSzquK2hxskqXvy8woCTx LKweTbuJ+19zsyHVGVmhMAaQ/AfCRwRe7yHm5oY+NYmsSGn+svMubxnbgm1cr18FZBEPC2/c16Xd 7sC9aC4xteE1WLqGS9YoqrsZ2DyteN0e+ECCv9/f+GPymkgDVo7QBKA4MctKq4ifYPcXFRL2K3LA EfDXVOdt7wDbusYnuEVWSxKMHbU0zkNM3EElFDaoLuOPKc8gc82pKfhB7T02ZXdoQxMs//iOE4Fl hiCv9TR+UxzLZWL8hwGBjhoI3W+YcuHfP5PkZb5A+wE5qGdpH54Oa3V8I76VOEvlwPpZ90pncljT Sb0eCPh6fGVjVg/I1zTYZRaNE2jpldWqjSgC8dPkXRqD2moUSNRh34RcAATYmxLn1ff7ur6h9eGH gbVpRK3T9+h2PwMALJBCDTA53SfyCyzomAc2ZL8bYLdCp3Zd9clP8wSiJZWbJCg35R5vCGCRun6Y x0PkyFKGUEeMyNRMjxjIzix9J1obLTXg724gFzhHYUe+7aKm0vWBn7K8QzCDDjZZ4GX7tRh5Ti+J 2sBvM/O0p+zizleC4lU8fDj1CnRx+r4b/1Q/PZ+dfmTgrw+rgmiseH+agA3SvOnCUbNPgcPcQwzM gKHyQxUo+ql2ySTkvEFH/23XMww2BnTTFGX5/yI4Ky+1ZJcbGqc5H4PEZHeoI/d6LWFf332z7LMw LGdoi9FMQ5j9dQUvMi1YKAun15JQSJLyCT5k+MTObVKxHy/dols381l9r9ft9daDonlwd6LnuX+J u10=
X-Report-Abuse-To: spam@quarantine11.antispamcloud.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/etosat/l93R1nRlX5vqZDSTOni_VO-5SyI>
Subject: Re: [EToSat] What we are looking for from QUIC
X-BeenThere: etosat@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "The EToSat list is a non-WG mailing list used to discuss performance implications of running encrypted transports such as QUIC over satellite." <etosat.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/etosat>, <mailto:etosat-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/etosat/>
List-Post: <mailto:etosat@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:etosat-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/etosat>, <mailto:etosat-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2019 18:04:50 -0000

This reminds me of the "case for FEC" paper that I wrote a long time ago. The abstract is here: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-0-387-34986-2_8

My copy of the text, in Postscript, is here: http://huitema.net/papers/case4fec.ps

-- Christian Huitema 

> On Dec 9, 2019, at 3:31 AM, Su, Chi-Jiun <Chi-Jiun.Su@hughes.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Morten,
> 
> John may respond to you when he is available.
> I work in the same company as John.
> Yes. You're right more or less.
> 
> - large window requires allocation of memory.  The number may be significantly huge for a server serving tens/hundreds of thousands of connections.
> - FEC adds overhead in transmitted bytes and delay in encoding and decoding of FEC in addition to computational resource requirements.
> 
> Hope it answers your questions.
> Thanks.
> cj
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: EToSat <etosat-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Morten V. Pedersen
> Sent: Monday, December 9, 2019 6:20 AM
> To: etosat@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [EToSat] What we are looking for from QUIC
> 
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
> 
> Hi John,
> Could you elaborate on the point below:
> 
> --------------------------
> 
>> On 12/3/19 7:43 PM, Border, John wrote:
>> We are looking at FEC to help with the packet loss problem and large 
>> windows to address the throughput problem.  Since enabling FEC and 
>> very large windows (especially initial windows) will not be good 
>> defaults for general use, we need some sort of learning capability to 
>> know when they should be used.
> 
> --------------------------
> 
> Is it because of computational complexity or similar?
> 
> All the best,
> Morten
> 
> _______________________________________________
> EToSat mailing list
> EToSat@ietf.org
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/etosat__;!!Emaut56SYw!jbhJ11p7YT7--EvCJ88bLI55OqJl1kcHQ46EEnS7wGZdk3cJCgFk3JMytIjk4Fi9Cw$ 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> EToSat mailing list
> EToSat@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/etosat

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email