Re: [homegate] HOMENET working group proposal

Mark Townsley <> Wed, 13 July 2011 12:07 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18B9821F88AC for <>; Wed, 13 Jul 2011 05:07:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PzWpF6-vMu0W for <>; Wed, 13 Jul 2011 05:07:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D469E21F88A6 for <>; Wed, 13 Jul 2011 05:07:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by fxe4 with SMTP id 4so7363910fxe.27 for <>; Wed, 13 Jul 2011 05:07:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id b22mr1643138fav.95.1310558859942; Wed, 13 Jul 2011 05:07:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] ( []) by with ESMTPS id w15sm10483414faj.23.2011. (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 13 Jul 2011 05:07:37 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Mark Townsley <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 14:07:35 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
References: <> <> <> <>
To: ken carlberg <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
Subject: Re: [homegate] HOMENET working group proposal
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Broadband Home Gateway Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 12:07:45 -0000

On Jul 12, 2011, at 4:33 PM, ken carlberg wrote:

> Fred,
>> I think that the need is felt in home, SOHO, and hotel (eg, broadband last mile) networks, and suggestions I have made along such lines have focused on them. However, the topic is closer to the charter of tsvwg IMHO, except in the ways that it manifests in broadband interfaces (the fact of the router, modem, CMTS/DSLAM, and upstream router being separate entities with separate buffers). The problem is in essence that ECN/AQM is generally not implemented in such networks, in part because there is a sense on the carrier side that loss is a bad thing, and in part because tuning the algorithms can be a pain. What the Georgia Tech folks have worked out, as much as anything, is an acceptable configuration driven by user perceptions rather than research optimizations (eg, for them it's not about finding the absolute knee of the curve and making the combined queue be as thin as possible, but finding a pragmatic solution that is predictable and acceptable to the typical user).
> given that a lot of these boxes are linux-based, is it a case of not being implemented, or simply not being turned on in the shipped image?  And if the latter, then perhaps Homegate/Homenet offers us a means of configuring ECN/AQM.

Certainly, a primary homenet requirement would be that the parameters configure themselves so that a user does not have to. 

- Mark

> And I agree, the algorithms would be something that is advanced in TSVWG.  And we're also in agreement that the home/SOHO/hotel segment is just one part of where bufferbloat can manifest itself.
> -ken
> _______________________________________________
> homegate mailing list