IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [TLS] [EXT] Re: Time to first byte vs time to last byte

"Kampanakis, Panos" <kpanos@amazon.com> Thu, 14 March 2024 03:22 UTC

Return-Path: <prvs=796ea9d41=kpanos@amazon.com>
X-Original-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0C9FC14F6B7 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Mar 2024 20:22:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.105
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.105 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_BLOCKED=0.001, 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] 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 3QtCYZKB3MHS for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Mar 2024 20:22:05 -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 D8D33C14F6AB for <tls@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 Mar 2024 20:22:04 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=amazon.com; i=@amazon.com; q=dns/txt; s=amazon201209; t=1710386525; x=1741922525; h=from:to:cc:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: mime-version:subject; bh=h3goxzcxkj0FNzsDg02PgqkBBVvfALKEF4aZeTNT1LY=; b=bkwmo/DDEpoGdk8GLG+88lPF9UPZeSSpwHgwt8FuG9Nz0uATzSLDWVYx o5yTOzNjbf7lt6pKOQMQzk3aFv/Y9Hu3AqAz5fI/+c00WEqSPQq7RCWXL mQqbHt9XAfhzjyLot4P7EqROp68QRRQkv0ACz2y1BYxWPItYPu0Znx50z c=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.07,124,1708387200"; d="scan'208,217";a="619534883"
Thread-Topic: [EXT] Re: [TLS] Time to first byte vs time to last byte
Received: from iad12-co-svc-p1-lb1-vlan3.amazon.com (HELO smtpout.prod.us-east-1.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; 14 Mar 2024 03:22:03 +0000
Received: from EX19MTAUEA001.ant.amazon.com [10.0.44.209:58761] by smtpin.naws.us-east-1.prod.farcaster.email.amazon.dev [10.0.11.117:2525] with esmtp (Farcaster) id 4cc11dcf-b4ed-47d2-a591-5dd6bea1261a; Thu, 14 Mar 2024 03:22:02 +0000 (UTC)
X-Farcaster-Flow-ID: 4cc11dcf-b4ed-47d2-a591-5dd6bea1261a
Received: from EX19D004UEC002.ant.amazon.com (10.252.135.181) by EX19MTAUEA001.ant.amazon.com (10.252.134.203) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1258.28; Thu, 14 Mar 2024 03:22:02 +0000
Received: from EX19D001ANA001.ant.amazon.com (10.37.240.156) by EX19D004UEC002.ant.amazon.com (10.252.135.181) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1258.28; Thu, 14 Mar 2024 03:22:01 +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; Thu, 14 Mar 2024 03:21:59 +0000
From: "Kampanakis, Panos" <kpanos@amazon.com>
To: "Blumenthal, Uri - 0553 - MITLL" <uri@ll.mit.edu>, "research@bensmyth.com" <research@bensmyth.com>
CC: Bas Westerbaan <bas@cloudflare.com>, "TLS@ietf.org" <tls@ietf.org>, "Childs-Klein, Will" <childw@amazon.com>
Thread-Index: AQHadV3IDQpmDz2LnU6fLTomfBQjLbE2QPOAgAANNgCAAEQPQA==
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2024 03:21:59 +0000
Message-ID: <1e97a5ac76fe4e8a82e9cb6418dfb127@amazon.com>
References: <CAFR824zRjvC=+EoXXpVVZYVevrZeuudgTCCSp42wbbBu1NPBXA@mail.gmail.com> <CAF8qwaAd=k6YLUgcyh8QZOYy+rBrB8_SNxsWbDCExmO=aby6qQ@mail.gmail.com> <9e84358da9fb403a93416ae6d58d1917@amazon.com> <5c22bb70-cc6d-43c8-a02b-830a88480f24@betaapp.fastmail.com> <fefa9193dfac459d9b84ae49782ed9f0@amazon.com> <CAMjbhoXdhSZJjkWi=j6o0tUsnMbjTz72_45D+-ySm2mEmW7__g@mail.gmail.com> <CA+_8xu3ykwdg3toad4PJreXSSzBtPxAaMqC2QrAh7DWD=jyYZA@mail.gmail.com> <1A51A0E4-D32D-4A04-982D-CCC29291A6DC@ll.mit.edu> <CA+_8xu250qmOgZv_=_JMoCw8o7Q1m+oMy=558hw-ACkGKvDa=Q@mail.gmail.com> <E5DF0615-4AD0-4EAF-8C85-4E988615277C@ll.mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <E5DF0615-4AD0-4EAF-8C85-4E988615277C@ll.mit.edu>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.37.240.172]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_1e97a5ac76fe4e8a82e9cb6418dfb127amazoncom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/DAK_6LFPAqQUnrFfHea-swiC2vg>
Subject: Re: [TLS] [EXT] Re: Time to first byte vs time to last byte
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is the mailing list for the Transport Layer Security working group of the IETF." <tls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tls/>
List-Post: <mailto:tls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2024 03:22:05 -0000

I think we are getting distracted from the point which is to consider the whole connection time when assessing handshake impact. Even an extra RTT due to initcwnd=10 becomes less and less significant when we are talking about 5+ RTTs to establish the conn and transfer >50KB of data.

Interestingly enough, for the example page size in question (72KB), the total connection time includes the same number of RTTs (assuming initcwnd=10~=15KB):
- Classical case: 1 for the TCP handshake + 1 for the TLS handshake + 3 for the data (15+30+27)
- PQ case: 1 for the TCP handshake + 2 for the TLS handshake + 2 for the data (30+42)
OK, this is just because of how 72KB aligns with the TCP congestion window increasing.


From: Blumenthal, Uri - 0553 - MITLL <uri@ll.mit.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2024 7:16 PM
To: research@bensmyth.com
Cc: Bas Westerbaan <bas@cloudflare.com>; Kampanakis, Panos <kpanos@amazon.com>; TLS@ietf.org; Childs-Klein, Will <childw@amazon.com>
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] [EXT] Re: [TLS] Time to first byte vs time to last byte

Please, let us not assume every website is behind a CDN.
Isn't that assumption reasonable? At least for global websites --- without CDN performance sucks.
Of course it isn’t.

As a reference point:

Consider reading the New York Times in Canberra,

Well, if you have nothing better to do there… ;-)

doesn't happen without CDN

Of course. The whole point is not to assume every website is behind CDN. Which part of “every” is unclear?
Of course there are sites behind a CDN of some kind. And there are sites that are not.  It is stupid unwise to ignore that.

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status