Re: [tsvwg] [Ecn-sane] Comments on L4S drafts

Pete Heist <pete@heistp.net> Fri, 26 July 2019 13:10 UTC

Return-Path: <pete@heistp.net>
X-Original-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7ACD8120139 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 06:10:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=heistp.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 0oGbvGDlf6rV for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 06:10:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk1-x72b.google.com (mail-qk1-x72b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::72b]) (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 E45D512012B for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 06:10:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk1-x72b.google.com with SMTP id s145so38961035qke.7 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 06:10:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=heistp.net; s=google; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=K2Yw0gWIjs4Uy26S9QM7Y5VLeVGCEz3Ft5r2Nnpe+Wc=; b=jI3OMGu6dDBmqqj2M7NF9zKyQ407qAIcccFKZXyn1izssukfyoI+rImGrda/7xKz9m Ls32NodWoDkC04T6xB4bH2KAsXkH4XOgNGIGbu1AkSF9J0KBPVf6+PEx1L4wRrRFWqFr 5O9GyR/G4NqsMNGdA+EZ57kZhARNx8gqyhVXXfi0N2ucTu0+uu1gKW1FjRFunbgGr4OK 181RDG74wnwZtYGyIhBTf21f3R4Fk7CgNezSeJGbSNxszjWThsaOkiT5a3XXTyK3cmBx W3ugl1zlFDwcLbc1nPh49eWFhw5pApjuBYwCt2v03bHjcPOuBneseAjJxo2kbRGEfZ9R 2Oig==
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=K2Yw0gWIjs4Uy26S9QM7Y5VLeVGCEz3Ft5r2Nnpe+Wc=; b=qm/w8G4EH94sLbY81Lm8XbB9iMY/DTNFLgvDtBXNt1EDsZYz6j7KvzciMKDUFOsbP+ FzlAYLwq7BfjrTayM2/M2u5mnGWHJRNtdMufzYiZZz/wDRT90XyssyjcFz64s+vf1/9B 7x0a94ZFm3vNIEoNUfQQnGLu5P6OpxuKprHajKNoZM9kTYhWAIHEMFEfpOQAHLYmXtPL VdsGsTSs6kzMlfmm1d47Bt0NQ+A7xDgtmL/qDp6OyqbF/H8amdjNEr/9+eMX+b1xWvW1 Z4mAdqjEFWaiiDAGefaDnlXEaYDHXiYT7hIHELPH9H5/2oYnCCodUceKk1vPoqc6IKoL Bf/A==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVSgzlexk/uS1fs3aube7e4anQex6yMGtwuKuR1o1Y7Ltsa+Afr xDD8fpmZEeAtYl1ebfhfYQadZA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqy8fzs4vCFd+wL24fXflbKQ7ylwKinb27gOGd91r4m+Md3TC2ATBOSFtzfUmuy4bRnFYfjEgg==
X-Received: by 2002:a37:b646:: with SMTP id g67mr61244378qkf.92.1564146648070; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 06:10:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from yoda-3.lan (173-246-8-242.qc.cable.ebox.net. [173.246.8.242]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b5sm22250727qkk.78.2019.07.26.06.10.47 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 26 Jul 2019 06:10:47 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Pete Heist <pete@heistp.net>
In-Reply-To: <AM4PR07MB3459D891047B874E5AABB7D1B9C10@AM4PR07MB3459.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 09:10:46 -0400
Cc: "ecn-sane@lists.bufferbloat.net" <ecn-sane@lists.bufferbloat.net>, "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <B356F262-6047-4CA1-A6B8-B780C7981F63@heistp.net>
References: <364514D5-07F2-4388-A2CD-35ED1AE38405@akamai.com> <1238A446-6E05-4A55-8B3B-878C8F39FC75@gmail.com> <AM4PR07MB3459B1173917DAFBCEB25511B9FA0@AM4PR07MB3459.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <17B33B39-D25A-432C-9037-3A4835CCC0E1@gmail.com> <AM4PR07MB345956F52D92759F24FFAA13B9F50@AM4PR07MB3459.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <52F85CFC-B7CF-4C7A-88B8-AE0879B3CCFE@gmail.com> <AM4PR07MB3459B471C4D7ADAE4CF713F3B9F60@AM4PR07MB3459.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <D231681B-1E57-44E1-992A-E8CC423926B6@akamai.com> <AM4PR07MB34592A10E2625C2C32B9893EB9F00@AM4PR07MB3459.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <A6F05DD3-D276-4893-9B15-F48E3018A129@gmx.de> <AM4PR07MB3459487C8A79B1152E132CE1B9CB0@AM4PR07MB3459.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <87ef2myqzv.fsf@taht.net> <a85d38ba-98ac-e43e-7610-658f4d03e0f4@mti-systems.com> <CE03DB3D7B45C245BCA0D243277949363062879C@MX307CL04.corp.emc.com> <803D9CA8-220E-4F98-9B8E-6CE2916C3100@gmail.com> <0079BC6B-4792-48ED-90D3-D9A69407F316@gmx.de> <22af0671-fdd0-0953-fc96-55b34beb0be9@bobbriscoe.net> <AC3C0A74-43C7-4351-B4FA-33AD2066B479@gmail.com> <VI1PR07MB34703F2998D9EE7B79BD4E60B9C40@VI1PR07MB3470.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <3EB0D59D-69A7-4730-BCDF-10E5C61EF987@heistp.net> <AM4PR07MB3459D891047B874E5AABB7D1B9C10@AM4PR07MB3459.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
To: "De Schepper, Koen (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)" <koen.de_schepper@nokia-bell-labs.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/-pH4YmWsjcsTJgJF2SpO4jtF6jM>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] [Ecn-sane] Comments on L4S drafts
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tsvwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 13:10:53 -0000

> On Jul 25, 2019, at 12:14 PM, De Schepper, Koen (Nokia - BE/Antwerp) <koen.de_schepper@nokia-bell-labs.com> wrote:
> 
> We have the testbed running our reference kernel version 3.19 with the drop patch. Let me know if you want to see the difference in behavior between the “good” DCTCP and the “deteriorated” DCTCP in the latest kernels too. There were several issues introduced which made DCTCP both more aggressive, and currently less aggressive. It calls for better regression tests (for Prague at least) to make sure it’s behavior is not changed too drastically by new updates. If enough people are interested, we can organize a session in one of the available rooms.
>  
> Pete, Jonathan,
>  
> Also for testing further your tests, let me know when you are available.

Regarding testing, we now have a five node setup in our test environment running a mixture of tcp-prague and dualq kernels to cover the scenarios Jon outlined earlier. With what little time we’ve had for it this week, we’ve only done some basic tests, and seem to be seeing behavior similar to what we saw at the hackathon, but we can discuss specific results following IETF 105.

Our intention is to coordinate a public effort to create reproducible test scenarios for L4S using flent. Details to follow post-conference. We do feel it’s important that all of our Linux testing be on modern 5.1+ kernels, as the 3.19 series was end of life as of May 2015 (https://lwn.net/Articles/643934/), so we'll try to keep up to date with any patches you might have for the newer kernels.

Overall, I think we’ve improved the cooperation between the teams this week (from zero to a little bit :), which should hopefully help move both projects along...