Re: [tcpm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tcpm-cubic-00.txt

Michael Welzl <michawe@ifi.uio.no> Tue, 30 June 2015 09:54 UTC

Return-Path: <michawe@ifi.uio.no>
X-Original-To: tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B8551A8706 for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Jun 2015 02:54:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 8JuQoqapK2AM for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Jun 2015 02:54:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-out4.uio.no (mail-out4.uio.no [IPv6:2001:700:100:10::15]) (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 192FF1A8701 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Tue, 30 Jun 2015 02:54:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-mx6.uio.no ([129.240.10.40]) by mail-out4.uio.no with esmtp (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from <michawe@ifi.uio.no>) id 1Z9sF0-0001d6-NI; Tue, 30 Jun 2015 11:54:10 +0200
Received: from [213.174.117.243] (helo=[10.40.118.69]) by mail-mx6.uio.no with esmtpsa (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) user michawe (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from <michawe@ifi.uio.no>) id 1Z9sEz-0004qt-TN; Tue, 30 Jun 2015 11:54:10 +0200
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2070.6\))
From: Michael Welzl <michawe@ifi.uio.no>
In-Reply-To: <B47D83B7-82E7-4427-96DB-662B2F6A1891@netapp.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2015 11:54:08 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <C0A579DD-7AD8-4291-92F5-FA33C1A94834@ifi.uio.no>
References: <20150618192420.26836.11116.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <B47D83B7-82E7-4427-96DB-662B2F6A1891@netapp.com>
To: "Zimmermann, Alexander" <Alexander.Zimmermann@netapp.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2070.6)
X-UiO-SPF-Received:
X-UiO-Ratelimit-Test: rcpts/h 11 msgs/h 7 sum rcpts/h 12 sum msgs/h 8 total rcpts 30557 max rcpts/h 54 ratelimit 0
X-UiO-Spam-info: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-5.0, required=5.0, autolearn=disabled, UIO_MAIL_IS_INTERNAL=-5, uiobl=NO, uiouri=NO)
X-UiO-Scanned: B007D19B671C129C791649012273EE23D703BF7A
X-UiO-SPAM-Test: remote_host: 213.174.117.243 spam_score: -49 maxlevel 80 minaction 2 bait 0 mail/h: 6 total 6 max/h 6 blacklist 0 greylist 0 ratelimit 0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/OWQCfrZuPt4RAKNY3jEtmVtMBgk>
Cc: "tcpm@ietf.org Extensions" <tcpm@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tcpm-cubic-00.txt
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tcpm/>
List-Post: <mailto:tcpm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2015 09:54:14 -0000

Hi,

A detail:

the beta factor (for multiplication when there is congestion) is 0.7, not 0.8, since Linux kernel 2.6.25 from 2008.
The draft talks about beta as a (1-beta) multiplication factor - so, accordingly, to capture the current implementation state, in section 3.5:

***
When a packet loss occurs, CUBIC reduces its window size by a factor
   of beta.  Parameter beta SHOULD be set to 0.2.
***

should be:

***
When a packet loss occurs, CUBIC reduces its window size by a factor
   of beta.  Parameter beta SHOULD be set to 0.3.
***


Side note: personally I find this use of beta confusing - "reduce by ..." indicates subtraction to me, and I'm not sure if "reduce by a factor of" is easily parsed by everyone as "multiplied by (1- ...)". Just like the code, I would therefore rather write:

***
When a packet loss occurs, CUBIC reduces its window size by multiplying it with a factor
   of beta.  The parameter beta SHOULD be set to 0.7.
***

... and change (1-beta) to beta below. But that's just a matter of style/taste I guess.

Cheers,
Michael



> On 19. jun. 2015, at 09.12, Zimmermann, Alexander <Alexander.Zimmermann@netapp.com> wrote:
> 
> This is just a resubmission of draft-zimmermann-tcpm-cubic-01 as WG item.
> Received feedback will be addressed in upcoming versions
> 
> Alex
> 
>> Am 18.06.2015 um 21:24 schrieb internet-drafts@ietf.org:
>> 
>> 
>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
>> This draft is a work item of the TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group of the IETF.
>> 
>>       Title           : CUBIC for Fast Long-Distance Networks
>>       Authors         : Injong Rhee
>>                         Lisong Xu
>>                         Sangtae Ha
>>                         Alexander Zimmermann
>>                         Lars Eggert
>>                         Richard Scheffenegger
>> 	Filename        : draft-ietf-tcpm-cubic-00.txt
>> 	Pages           : 14
>> 	Date            : 2015-06-18
>> 
>> Abstract:
>>  CUBIC is an extension to the current TCP standards.  The protocol
>>  differs from the current TCP standards only in the congestion window
>>  adjustment function in the sender side.  In particular, it uses a
>>  cubic function instead of a linear window increase of the current TCP
>>  standards to improve scalability and stability under fast and long
>>  distance networks.  BIC-TCP, a predecessor of CUBIC, has been a
>>  default TCP adopted by Linux since year 2005 and has already been
>>  deployed globally and in use for several years by the Internet
>>  community at large.  CUBIC is using a similar window growth function
>>  as BIC-TCP and is designed to be less aggressive and fairer to TCP in
>>  bandwidth usage than BIC-TCP while maintaining the strengths of BIC-
>>  TCP such as stability, window scalability and RTT fairness.  Through
>>  extensive testing in various Internet scenarios, we believe that
>>  CUBIC is safe for deployment and testing in the global Internet.  The
>>  intent of this document is to provide the protocol specification of
>>  CUBIC for a third party implementation and solicit the community
>>  feedback through experimentation on the performance of CUBIC.
>> 
>> 
>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tcpm-cubic/
>> 
>> There's also a htmlized version available at:
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tcpm-cubic-00
>> 
>> 
>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
>> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
>> 
>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> tcpm mailing list
>> tcpm@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm
> 
> _______________________________________________
> tcpm mailing list
> tcpm@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm