Re: Draft: QUIC Throughput Testing

[Ian Swett <[e-mail]>]

I would suggest looking at the ACK frequency draf
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-quic-ack-frequency/>t, or some
similar approaches.  Otherwise it can be very difficult to achieve
comparable speeds as TCP.

See Fastly's nice post
<https://www.fastly.com/blog/measuring-quic-vs-tcp-computational-efficiency>
about what it took to get comparable performance in QUIC as TCP.

On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 6:06 AM Tom Jones <[e-mail]> wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 09:15:58AM +0000, Kévin Corre wrote:
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > Our team at EXFO is working on adapting the TCP Throughput Testing
> methodology described in RFC6349 to QUIC. We just published a draft that
> can be found at
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-corre-quic-throughput-testing
> > The draft follows the same organization as the RFC6349 and discuss what
> should be changed to support QUIC Throughput Testing.
> > The methodology is interested in measuring the achievable QUIC
> throughput and efficiency of a managed network when the connection is at an
> equilibrium. Although, it could also be used for un-managed networks.
> >
> > We are particularly looking for comments on the way we use the protocol
> to measure the network's QUIC Throughput but also feedback from potential
> users of such a test.
> > For instance, our draft closely follows the RFC6349 methodology, but
> since QUIC introduces new features, it would be interesting to gauge
> interest in extending the methodology to test features such as 0-RTT effect.
> >
> > Comments would be gladly appreciated, so let us know what you think.
> >
>
> Hi Kévin,
>
> Have you seen draft-banks-quic-performance? I don't see a reference to
> it in your document. This protocol has implementations using a number of
> quic different libraries.
>
> There is also a perf channel on the quic slack, please ask off list if
> you require an invite.
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-banks-quic-performance-00.txt
>
> - Tom
>
>