Re: [tcpm] [tsvwg] "David's proposal" for cc class terms (was RE: L4S status tracking)

Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com> Wed, 13 November 2019 17:05 UTC

Return-Path: <chromatix99@gmail.com>
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 075F212088A; Wed, 13 Nov 2019 09:05:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.749
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.749 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 jth3iRjSUnFZ; Wed, 13 Nov 2019 09:05:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lj1-x22a.google.com (mail-lj1-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::22a]) (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 89D8A12004F; Wed, 13 Nov 2019 09:05:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lj1-x22a.google.com with SMTP id t5so3447972ljk.0; Wed, 13 Nov 2019 09:05:32 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=0mZ688kKuo4La7Oze8xQoDt2KXv74fNun1Yg6jh+NZw=; b=unKTZFZkebBW+tXRId7afIAEFliCqQJLWiDridjWzeD/0OEfdn0HZLtYfISHnU7UFb vrtO1T/0ALAlrtAC8Zzoaf+QwPHTUJESmkDN/gnuXCjdkb55K5eGa87ziyG58dtQVr2t uUhqwDjI6GBM7oNuU5vSMq+4YmYR11nx1srlIRTlyKlRQrtKTpig0xEq0nK7qiOvmbG8 8J67X3muK6G6F5EchEBjpSBkDoztUVTP5Ub/+WZKPCsP1zgtgEOrHJxG/CVh9KmRNVTU wMoHU7O7vfMOzTkU/b27bTOyJWvfexwZDiWsMzlo7j4j4gkkbL9bSj5gIZbqPV8+4yEZ V6NA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=0mZ688kKuo4La7Oze8xQoDt2KXv74fNun1Yg6jh+NZw=; b=ZaCzy4KOCuRflVrybUK4dZrJY8m8dODYwjaeQ37vc0+QwAIAZQmatOr2GYNkjToZ/+ LHIvO2BvSZ+ajU47l6DcRPn8ufmzIA31zLF351GeowieaJVp8oNOavnVfNCtMn0swzv+ QipP/zFH2BmqaKfSH/f9aYzmZuZ3d76kG4jO+8KeNFicpjYNkJbqxT3g+K1OnK7DSVI8 yifDCmfSbVTwrDZdzmG46BISVJ1eJLzMUOwzKKWSxBFcfX7FtAzlZWSW1SJ6gNFlzkEO /tWLdZ3hMC9I50ih+Poen4Xdvp2aDhLmnerOrDlfMe6vbQwlm1tOX07x1CczjlMeLe+h xa8Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUzBJAtVzYEAhXNIrYUKUpXKnK1Nx5UkOeUoNo1BOhFzMD40AAM 7WKnsvPOPaw4C6pCRwOhgvw=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwLRMOtg55/FzGWWc/jdLkpFdPGi9TLAMUcpUYO5YfsmQrHMIA32ItCkRxSSDvCmluAUO18LQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:b4da:: with SMTP id r26mr3082421ljm.153.1573664730753; Wed, 13 Nov 2019 09:05:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from jonathartonsmbp.lan (85-76-23-24-nat.elisa-mobile.fi. [85.76.23.24]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i30sm1394160lfp.39.2019.11.13.09.05.29 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 13 Nov 2019 09:05:30 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <MN2PR19MB4045EAFC55061858895E2F0983760@MN2PR19MB4045.namprd19.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2019 19:05:19 +0200
Cc: Bob Briscoe <ietf@bobbriscoe.net>, "Scharf, Michael" <Michael.Scharf@hs-esslingen.de>, Wesley Eddy <wes@mti-systems.com>, "Rodney W. Grimes" <4bone@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>, "tcpm@ietf.org" <tcpm@ietf.org>, "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <05DAB658-8B0A-4DA9-93E9-2A3B871023DC@gmail.com>
References: <MN2PR19MB4045EAFC55061858895E2F0983760@MN2PR19MB4045.namprd19.prod.outlook.com>
To: "Black, David" <David.Black@dell.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/S_jkxDP7zPFSKZXydMFry_Ny2wk>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] [tsvwg] "David's proposal" for cc class terms (was RE: L4S status tracking)
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: Wed, 13 Nov 2019 17:05:34 -0000

> On 13 Nov, 2019, at 6:15 pm, Black, David <David.Black@dell.com> wrote:
> 
> We are dealing with two classes of congestion controls.  For lack of better terms the following class names are based on what the transport protocol throughput is proportional to where ‘p’ is the loss and/or congestion marking probability:
>                - 1/sqrt(p)-class congestion controls: Includes most existing TCP congestion control algorithms, e.g., NewReno, CUBIC.
>                - 1/p-class congestion controls: Includes DCTCP congestion control.
> Keep in mind that p is a probability that is usually << 1 when expressed as a decimal, e.g., p=0.01 represents a 1% loss/marking rate.

Specifically CE marking or loss.  SCE marking can orthogonally elicit a DCTCP-style 1/p-class or an SCE-specific 1/(p*sqrt(p)) class of response, overlaid on the normal 1/sqrt(p) response to CE.

To give these a more intuitively recognisable face, may I suggest:

- "MD" for Multiplicative Decrease, for the traditional 1/sqrt(p)-class TCP response.

- "DCTCP" for the 1/p-class response introduced by that scheme.

- "ELR" for Explicit Load Regulation, for SCE's preferred 1/(p*sqrt(p))-class response.

ELR was an early name considered for SCE, using a control element commonly found in diesel locomotives (known as a Load Regulator) as inspiration.  This generally has a slow adjustment mode for small disturbances from steady state, and a fast adjustment mode for larger disturbances.  The MD response corresponds to the fast adjustment mode, and the ELR response with the traditional linear cwnd growth correspond to the slow adjustment mode.  Since SCE refers specifically to the signalling method, we can use ELR to avoid confusion when referring to the response function.

Incidentally, another way of writing the above formulae is as an exponent to p:

- p^-0.5 is 1/sqrt(p)

- p^-1 is 1/p

- p^-1.5 is 1/(p*sqrt(p))

The above may also be more readable, if not as familiar to non-mathematicians.

 - Jonathan Morton