Re: [tcpPrague] [tsvwg] L4S and BBR (was: [iccrg] ecn-l4s-id: Proposed Changed to Normative Classic ECN detection Text)

Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> Sun, 01 November 2020 20:54 UTC

Return-Path: <moeller0@gmx.de>
X-Original-To: tcpprague@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpprague@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C9FB3A0100; Sun, 1 Nov 2020 12:54:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.649
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.649 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=gmx.net
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 RrndkDh5hhnI; Sun, 1 Nov 2020 12:54:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.15]) (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 820E93A00E5; Sun, 1 Nov 2020 12:54:41 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1604264033; bh=HlsAAoo2ZFuGVL7fU+VlJ0O+9ssMSKMEnFdy2U8stMo=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=N+3SqtB8Aq7+1VHjF2YIXSKDRd8pEvXJtZ8gvsvNA5yr0qdv7cbOgkmZ5Eid2YzHQ MDL3o3F0R2OB+8N7mgVCwgScs7UZdwhu0oPeMMGDYxupjC0QR5S7keLcUM7JxwHI1A mYmHRxH5cRoluOtEKktcl7qmpfmKkF8ssyKH3q0U=
X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c
Received: from [134.76.241.253] ([134.76.241.253]) by web-mail.gmx.net (3c-app-gmx-bs25.server.lan [172.19.170.77]) (via HTTP); Sun, 1 Nov 2020 21:53:53 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <trinity-7da7cc36-8e0d-49d4-85c1-30e5ef173310-1604264033387@3c-app-gmx-bs25>
From: Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>
To: Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>
Cc: Bob Briscoe <ietf@bobbriscoe.net>, tsvwg IETF list <tsvwg@ietf.org>, iccrg IRTF list <iccrg@irtf.org>, TCP Prague List <tcpPrague@ietf.org>, "De Schepper, Koen (Koen)" <koen.de_schepper@nokia.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2020 21:53:53 +0100
Importance: normal
Sensitivity: Normal
In-Reply-To: <12c3cebf-e6e1-7c11-38cb-44c49c4e1d6e@huitema.net>
References: <1b71a610-75ea-e1d4-e3ce-f0ae6a4c12f7@bobbriscoe.net> <28247e5f-5df3-1f75-50e6-b4a7e80d5ab0@huitema.net> <69a73308-6718-7304-be24-0eb84f77e50d@bobbriscoe.net> <12c3cebf-e6e1-7c11-38cb-44c49c4e1d6e@huitema.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-UI-Message-Type: mail
X-Priority: 3
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:VV60FY5lsFDZooeFb25qf5mD3I0It1mBsZH/qkteBW5hRaOiPmXAvWSDNV1Nk52yh3/Yk lvDTyqP9tzO90gSztZqTY75ieNDm3jagwRN7rsCZ1nRz6eKFBsC8v8u11QGHbggB/D7RSDyhfw4N vkbAWazC0YzRMpyUDsn+vPG/PyI+ErQ1E5nI2kr3QfnGWYi31nZ+37QDJLmNCWngGVyEzpUtzD99 XIw+s6cCAYlJZeXeHz4XtPIbSP/y5h8ddi1O/gk9aBQmplLkmSf5Cl9O4n08MQXoBps3Ndp3PNtc h0=
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:qaeKP8/XLS8=:4GsQGzZHRESSdSgl/1ZG0D TKgqTnayIK9bRfqrB4/L6lpkTrMH5wDHTR9bW0El33tvQHoc4Sn5o1QL+scUSW1WOH0pmfzmn YzKWxD0UYmpiHr0a4TuUyXJBjdPYlMraJMcPOOcRloMgKExnn7/rGcJaT+TciChMfAkvFtnSN Wh6BLJqLuncXYiPWXo35fVl8VoThmnEK1yOhlCY62ohrqWX8kg9WZzbM63mWnUk5mJ+jtvLKs VnoqE+TIFX32NTMIGKWdEDPADybpb/34CxkADYfIUuWabYCNzqPA44C/unWDb70uUOer7iKJ1 qWqFJMboamvFYW7TPTiQptWV9x7f1xy/AKLX6As5ePWDRxquFejxE1xHa5Ct9TyAh3vqDFYqs 9QjRbpP/dKqcfjkB3ehEh1+VCEeNssmj3SEob9ztOI9uZOg0M8uAxLGSJmH7RT5WrfxBvT3e3 t2f3Sz9fodT3UNR+JoJWG0zepdwlbBAufybEtop28v6CJ0leNnuIubYdYql7FjbuUhHUxNArq 7vgRteVEvY6BF5ghbeMyYyeGgtiBTEjaqdG8e1mDwMW03HCJDu3C/Lzf+GN3OVEIKewfvZdsn Tzh73AIjXOCSc=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpprague/n8TSwtp2AIoshjc6nzh4oQls6T0>
Subject: Re: [tcpPrague] [tsvwg] L4S and BBR (was: [iccrg] ecn-l4s-id: Proposed Changed to Normative Classic ECN detection Text)
X-BeenThere: tcpprague@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "To coordinate implementation and standardisation of TCP Prague across platforms. TCP Prague will be an evolution of DCTCP designed to live alongside other TCP variants and derivatives." <tcpprague.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tcpprague>, <mailto:tcpprague-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tcpprague/>
List-Post: <mailto:tcpprague@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcpprague-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpprague>, <mailto:tcpprague-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 01 Nov 2020 20:54:44 -0000

Dear Christian,

more below in-line, prefixed with [SM]


> Gesendet: Sonntag, 01. November 2020 um 21:02 Uhr
> Von: "Christian Huitema" <huitema@huitema.net>
> An: "Bob Briscoe" <ietf@bobbriscoe.net>et>, "tsvwg IETF list" <tsvwg@ietf.org>
> Cc: "iccrg IRTF list" <iccrg@irtf.org>rg>, "TCP Prague List" <tcpPrague@ietf.org>rg>, "De Schepper, Koen (Koen)" <koen.de_schepper@nokia.com>
> Betreff: Re: [tsvwg] [tcpPrague] L4S and BBR (was: [iccrg] ecn-l4s-id: Proposed Changed to Normative Classic ECN detection Text)
>
> On 11/1/2020 5:30 AM, Bob Briscoe wrote:
> 
> >
> > Quentin De Coninck wrote an initial implementation of a "QUIC Prague"
> > congestion control based on your picoQUIC code. It can be accessed via
> > the L4S landing page here:
> >     https://riteproject.eu/dctth/#code
> > He started it at an IETF hackathon. I don't think it's been maintained
> > since it was first written, but it might be a start.
> 
> Care doing a PR so this could be added to the Picoquic distribution?

       [SM] A cursory look at prague.c at the repository indicates, that this code might not fulfil the "eliminate RTT bias requirement" yet (I might have missed the implementation, hence "might not fulfil"). Odd since the repository is linked from the L4S site at rite, obviously just an oversight that will be fixed in due time?
Or a sign, that requiring individual protocols to fix up deficiencies in core AQMs is simply an unsustainable approach, if even a team L4S endorsed implementation is allowed to fall out of requirements.

Best Regards
        Sebastian


> 
> -- Christian Huitema
> 
> 
>