Re: [tcpm] On Sender Control of Delayed Acks in TCP
Carles Gomez Montenegro <carlesgo@entel.upc.edu> Sat, 02 May 2020 08:49 UTC
Return-Path: <carlesgo@entel.upc.edu>
X-Original-To: tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E93E3A0B18 for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 May 2020 01:49:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.895
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.895 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 3FL2Ni_KpmUr for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 May 2020 01:49:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dash.upc.es (dash.upc.es [147.83.2.50]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E9AD83A0B17 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Sat, 2 May 2020 01:49:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from entelserver.upc.edu (entelserver.upc.es [147.83.39.4]) by dash.upc.es (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id 0428n2NC007149; Sat, 2 May 2020 10:49:02 +0200
Received: from webmail.entel.upc.edu (webmail.entel.upc.edu [147.83.39.6]) by entelserver.upc.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 529B31D53C1; Sat, 2 May 2020 10:49:01 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from 83.53.208.128 by webmail.entel.upc.edu with HTTP; Sat, 2 May 2020 10:49:02 +0200
Message-ID: <ac8bc2de8f91a2c14d1e857a6ebb26e7.squirrel@webmail.entel.upc.edu>
In-Reply-To: <CADVnQy=wPUx62y7VNqjSPP+snKX4vVvK5q=qqYb1j+0nGrtezQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <683902e8-a2af-cfb7-ffd0-c5c5742e5bd5@gmx.at> <CADVnQykY3OqXy=RcEfa-OpfK2x=W5_FTrdrx7PvKuqgEt92uNw@mail.gmail.com> <7d145f1203f6344b92f6f8aa11a78239.squirrel@webmail.entel.upc.edu> <CADVnQy=wPUx62y7VNqjSPP+snKX4vVvK5q=qqYb1j+0nGrtezQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 02 May 2020 10:49:02 +0200
From: Carles Gomez Montenegro <carlesgo@entel.upc.edu>
To: Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@google.com>
Cc: "Scheffenegger, Richard" <rs.ietf@gmx.at>, "tcpm@ietf.org" <tcpm@ietf.org>, Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>, Bob Briscoe <ietf@bobbriscoe.net>, jon.crowcroft@cl.cam.ac.uk
User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.21-1.fc14
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Importance: Normal
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.100.3 at dash
X-Virus-Status: Clean
X-Greylist: Delayed for 23:52:30 by milter-greylist-4.3.9 (dash.upc.es [147.83.2.50]); Sat, 02 May 2020 10:49:02 +0200 (CEST)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/OlHjbLuquYYe7twVPuZBHqbBph8>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] On Sender Control of Delayed Acks in TCP
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Sat, 02 May 2020 08:49:57 -0000
Hi Neal, >> > On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 1:03 PM Scheffenegger, Richard >> <rs.ietf@gmx.at> >> > wrote: >> >> Eliciting an ACK under certain circumstances, for a timely >> continuation >> >> of the data transmission / growth of the congestion window is a known >> >> method to reduce network delay. >> >> >> >> E.g. Linux has been using the CWR flag for the purpose of sending out >> an >> >> immediate ACK by the receiver, since there is an increased chance of >> a >> >> very small cwnd when the sender had just reduced it's congestion >> window. >> >> >> >> https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/970486/ >> >> >> >> and we also found latency improvements doing this when running >> >> ECN-enabled sessions >> >> >> >> https://reviews.freebsd.org/D22670 >> > >> > Yes, agreed. >> > >> > IMHO an explicit ACK-pull mechanism would be very nice for the cwnd<=1 >> > case. >> >> (While this question is about the solution space, I'm anyway curious...) >> In the context of datacenter networks, would you have any suggestion or >> preference regarding the solutions that have been mentioned so far? >> >> Or perhaps any particular requirement for a potential solution? > > Among the solutions outlined in > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gomez-tcpm-delack-suppr-reqs-00 > my first preference would be the AKP option, since that approach > avoids burning a precious flag bit. > > The AKP option may be stripped by some middleboxes, but (a) as a > performance optimization, that should be acceptable, and (b) for the > datacenter case (where cwnd=1 is a motivating use case) this should > not be a concern. > > IMHO a flag bit makes sense for a small signal that a sender might > want to send frequently or at a high rate, but senders should not be > trying to force immediate ACKs frequently. Thanks a lot for the very useful feedback. In the next draft update, we will expand the discussion of potential solutions accordingly. Cheers, Carles > best, > neal
- [tcpm] On Sender Control of Delayed Acks in TCP Scheffenegger, Richard
- Re: [tcpm] On Sender Control of Delayed Acks in T… Neal Cardwell
- Re: [tcpm] On Sender Control of Delayed Acks in T… Jonathan Morton
- Re: [tcpm] On Sender Control of Delayed Acks in T… Carles Gomez Montenegro
- Re: [tcpm] On Sender Control of Delayed Acks in T… Carles Gomez Montenegro
- Re: [tcpm] On Sender Control of Delayed Acks in T… Neal Cardwell
- Re: [tcpm] On Sender Control of Delayed Acks in T… Bob Briscoe
- Re: [tcpm] On Sender Control of Delayed Acks in T… Carles Gomez Montenegro
- Re: [tcpm] On Sender Control of Delayed Acks in T… Carles Gomez Montenegro
- Re: [tcpm] On Sender Control of Delayed Acks in T… Neal Cardwell
- Re: [tcpm] On Sender Control of Delayed Acks in T… Michael Tuexen
- Re: [tcpm] On Sender Control of Delayed Acks in T… Neal Cardwell
- Re: [tcpm] On Sender Control of Delayed Acks in T… Matt Mathis
- Re: [tcpm] On Sender Control of Delayed Acks in T… Gorry Fairhurst
- Re: [tcpm] On Sender Control of Delayed Acks in T… Ian Swett
- Re: [tcpm] On Sender Control of Delayed Acks in T… Gorry Fairhurst
- Re: [tcpm] On Sender Control of Delayed Acks in T… Ian Swett
- Re: [tcpm] On Sender Control of Delayed Acks in T… Gorry Fairhurst
- Re: [tcpm] [EXTERNAL] Re: On Sender Control of De… Praveen Balasubramanian
- Re: [tcpm] [EXTERNAL] Re: On Sender Control of De… Carles Gomez Montenegro
- Re: [tcpm] [EXTERNAL] Re: On Sender Control of De… Joseph Touch
- Re: [tcpm] [EXTERNAL] Re: On Sender Control of De… Carles Gomez Montenegro
- Re: [tcpm] [EXTERNAL] Re: On Sender Control of De… Joseph Touch
- Re: [tcpm] [EXTERNAL] Re: On Sender Control of De… Carles Gomez Montenegro