[tcpm] initcwnd updates?

"Kampanakis, Panos" <kpanos@amazon.com> Fri, 15 March 2024 15:31 UTC

Return-Path: <prvs=79709b5a0=kpanos@amazon.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 C72AEC14F690 for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Mar 2024 08:31:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.403
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.403 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=amazon.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XEPCM0L2Wcc5 for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Mar 2024 08:31:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp-fw-52002.amazon.com (smtp-fw-52002.amazon.com [52.119.213.150]) (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 7F7A4C14F603 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Mar 2024 08:31:34 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=amazon.com; i=@amazon.com; q=dns/txt; s=amazon201209; t=1710516695; x=1742052695; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=AXyQZC8qqjBDuAF969agt1NNe80BTK8lmRTHAuZgMyg=; b=A80bbWxICmz5SitRB00wj66sofLf7nGm41HRVfJ2CMlpF/MXOlw7K9nt 2RHL9qfQct9KXq7h7ZfUhN6tAUYCBUI7d7UkOsUSDpsDJt2/I2bDelXLd hAfHFX8zq7V+5oasZ2O81+LDVExGBaGkG9SYXmE3LcTF3N3ASm2l+9g5I I=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.07,128,1708387200"; d="scan'208,217";a="619938730"
Received: from iad12-co-svc-p1-lb1-vlan3.amazon.com (HELO smtpout.prod.us-west-2.prod.farcaster.email.amazon.dev) ([10.43.8.6]) by smtp-border-fw-52002.iad7.amazon.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 15 Mar 2024 15:31:33 +0000
Received: from EX19MTAUWA001.ant.amazon.com [10.0.7.35:9066] by smtpin.naws.us-west-2.prod.farcaster.email.amazon.dev [10.0.10.246:2525] with esmtp (Farcaster) id 7bb2d3cb-4b73-4e33-911c-9c8f0df9be34; Fri, 15 Mar 2024 15:31:31 +0000 (UTC)
X-Farcaster-Flow-ID: 7bb2d3cb-4b73-4e33-911c-9c8f0df9be34
Received: from EX19D001ANA003.ant.amazon.com (10.37.240.188) by EX19MTAUWA001.ant.amazon.com (10.250.64.204) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1258.28; Fri, 15 Mar 2024 15:31:30 +0000
Received: from EX19D001ANA001.ant.amazon.com (10.37.240.156) by EX19D001ANA003.ant.amazon.com (10.37.240.188) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA) id 15.2.1258.28; Fri, 15 Mar 2024 15:31:29 +0000
Received: from EX19D001ANA001.ant.amazon.com ([fe80::4f78:75cd:3117:8055]) by EX19D001ANA001.ant.amazon.com ([fe80::4f78:75cd:3117:8055%5]) with mapi id 15.02.1258.028; Fri, 15 Mar 2024 15:31:29 +0000
From: "Kampanakis, Panos" <kpanos@amazon.com>
To: "tcpm@ietf.org" <tcpm@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: initcwnd updates?
Thread-Index: Adp27WCjReJC1bPURKWc1AwiJ85pBQ==
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2024 15:31:29 +0000
Message-ID: <2c7008ebafdb43b480bada1205e6bb5e@amazon.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.37.240.200]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_2c7008ebafdb43b480bada1205e6bb5eamazoncom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/tmY-s-PAO9ubcb0PF1EFyxXeCWE>
Subject: [tcpm] initcwnd updates?
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Fri, 15 Mar 2024 15:31:38 -0000

Hi all,

Sorry if this has been asked recently, but looking in the list archive, I can't seem to find any discussions about it.

I was wondering if initcwnd updates have come up in TCPM recently.

It has been 14 years since draft-hkchu-tcpm-initcwnd started and 11 since RFC6928 got ratified.

Many CDNs use initicwnds=30 or more to increase performance.

Also, new post-quantum signatures, if they ever got deployed, could lead to >15KB of authentication data (certificate chain and CertificateVerify signature) which means they would add an unnecessary RTT when initcwnd=10. This has been in shown in various publications [1]<https://www.ndss-symposium.org/ndss-paper/post-quantum-authentication-in-tls-1-3-a-performance-study/>, [2]<https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3386367.3431305>, [3]<https://blog.cloudflare.com/sizing-up-post-quantum-signatures/>

So, I was wondering, should investigating the increase of the default TCP initcwnd be a topic for discussion over a decade after the last increase?
Has technology evolved enough for a new default initcwnd=15 or 20?

Rgs,
Panos

[1] https://www.ndss-symposium.org/ndss-paper/post-quantum-authentication-in-tls-1-3-a-performance-study/
[2] https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3386367.3431305
[3] https://blog.cloudflare.com/sizing-up-post-quantum-signatures/