IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Pictures of congestion control on the Internet - which is more realistic?

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Wed, 23 April 2014 16:25 UTC

Return-Path: <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CE861A037F for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Apr 2014 09:25:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 5kH8h9vEUuwc for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Apr 2014 09:25:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-we0-x232.google.com (mail-we0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c03::232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBB111A02A8 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Apr 2014 09:25:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-we0-f178.google.com with SMTP id u56so1103258wes.9 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Apr 2014 09:25:29 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=dCGfkrmBX59mumr23fwBW2GuBRrGut2fAZioT9KoeaI=; b=DX/Ck6wIOsEEz/PvgRf9W5PJeCIN2VXx88qpfpUHl2XiBHK13nilZMt4dJAZ1nLHPb 2812JCdLVeeFqUnsgRyzJcEFJmULYFWhhzSc/zJ+RHemk4dKmMOxd5gZxumwviMvrKB9 Cb6Mc+3hXB++De5tO+kcjEQ7aSt1oamxtbS/VhN70gDswZt2nuSSFSqQhBUN22wd1lyy l949KzIBUpEx/dmnBIAkwjIsGU8Ue8FxZ8M2W/u+jNi2b1suY//Z1un0RfxwOqVBuDAc Wg7GD0tAmKsCQ9qIi6Mm0HPqF9KcRGOqskvBl65gQJHQA25bgglLAlFElzkZutpoCx+5 iowA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.77.148 with SMTP id s20mr7153820wjw.31.1398270329683; Wed, 23 Apr 2014 09:25:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.227.144.132 with HTTP; Wed, 23 Apr 2014 09:25:29 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <5357B281.1030900@alvestrand.no>
References: <5357B281.1030900@alvestrand.no>
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2014 09:25:29 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnWApqp5S4i+1e=n3gyTVMrnLkebrNTKBhsLY6_zNdO0EA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/TQN4by7znUZm3xqd6mP2DRZPnok
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Pictures of congestion control on the Internet - which is more realistic?
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <rtcweb.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2014 16:25:37 -0000

On 23 April 2014 05:30, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> wrote:
> - All UDP endpoints that use the open Internet have some form of backoff on
> congestion - using delay, packet drop or (most likely) both to detect
> congestion

There's some evidence that this is true, but we wouldn't have RMCAT if
it weren't for the fact that there was pretty wide consensus that it's
not good enough.  Maybe the vendors of those soft video clients
Stephan mentions are confident that they have the answer, I don't
know.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email