Re: [tcpm] Lars Eggert's Discuss on draft-ietf-tcpm-2140bis-10: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Joseph Touch <touch@strayalpha.com> Mon, 29 March 2021 20:15 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@strayalpha.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 E47C73A2058; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 13:15:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.071
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.071 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HAS_X_OUTGOING_SPAM_STAT=2.388, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=strayalpha.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 5o6TrXMucvug; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 13:15:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from server217-4.web-hosting.com (server217-4.web-hosting.com [198.54.116.98]) (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 3EA473A205F; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 13:15:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=strayalpha.com; s=default; h=To:References:Message-Id:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To: From:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=4IgkHEe2qGLmaAHCuLIO3gVEYt26JMudAATtCMDflMg=; b=BXxKi8CWJ8fZsAVacEI08x8PH yhUmEF3THNQ7cn/8AkIzfEUnDLLgw3qVv2aW1r7u1Gb/8Y7OHcYAhd9823bpAJb2wBUhxitOyTDjW lD1iH0UfS+HmHa4PbFdcY/lljda0EU/pDESSM71KMEN/XVkiOwvxgDMMAmPAPzh445pKvmdxQ/l9s 441QBKuZxH6k/osP1CnESKd2IMugJPr2aL/cOzc6Yxs59+r/AUzMh8TIjelaX5FffQM3zKLiDI4zD Myu7SKmlHzzbdVQSQrDJ0lqAwjCu+rfquyWnx1nWvO00h0Wmhetw9iMbkWLzUO4o0Bn2K2LLH6Yf0 /v88PnN6A==;
Received: from cpe-172-250-225-198.socal.res.rr.com ([172.250.225.198]:62500 helo=[192.168.1.14]) by server217.web-hosting.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from <touch@strayalpha.com>) id 1lQyI3-002vCn-Uf; Mon, 29 Mar 2021 16:15:16 -0400
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_7A0E1BBD-F1FF-4D23-97F0-3E172F3DD5BC"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.60.0.2.21\))
From: Joseph Touch <touch@strayalpha.com>
In-Reply-To: <AA5B441A-7147-433B-BCA4-3B601CEE8429@eggert.org>
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2021 13:15:08 -0700
Cc: tcpm IETF list <tcpm@ietf.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-tcpm-2140bis@ietf.org, tcpm-chairs@ietf.org
Message-Id: <BD62BD78-ABEF-44C2-99C6-0B89FAE0D01A@strayalpha.com>
References: <161666423177.6408.1029658445364068197@ietfa.amsl.com> <92DFC0A5-9095-49BB-87EC-685A5B854983@strayalpha.com> <AA5B441A-7147-433B-BCA4-3B601CEE8429@eggert.org>
To: Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.60.0.2.21)
X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server217.web-hosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - strayalpha.com
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: server217.web-hosting.com: authenticated_id: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Authenticated-Sender: server217.web-hosting.com: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-From-Rewrite: unmodified, already matched
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/vYnqR-N2qyIilkCtChjWGVTwU30>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] Lars Eggert's Discuss on draft-ietf-tcpm-2140bis-10: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
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: Mon, 29 Mar 2021 20:15:31 -0000


> On Mar 28, 2021, at 11:23 PM, Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> wrote:
> 
>>> The modern web is using a lot fewer parallel connections compared to the web at
>>> the time RFC 2140 was written. So the example is slightly dated.
>> 
>> Can you clarify? All modern browsers are configured to allow 8-10 parallel connections, which is actually higher than when 2140 was written (it was half that).
> 
> With H2 and H3, all all Chrome-based browsers and Firefox use a default of one connection per server. With H1, the default of those browsers seems to be six. But H2/H3 are 3/4 of all traffic by some measures (e.g., https://radar.cloudflare.com/ <https://radar.cloudflare.com/>). So I stand by my argument.

Agreed, but I would note that:

	- the compartmentalization of the Internet means that we don’t know if we’re seeing an accurate representation
		CDNs hide traffic from many network taps
	- although chrome and Firefox may do this, they’re not the only browsers and web traffic isn’t the only TCP traffic
		Netflix and Amazon Prime both use TCP too; I’d bet they are a LOT more traffic (and Netflix uses multiple connections for a single stream)

I’ll update this to address both points.

Joe