IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tsvwg] L4S and the detection of RFC3168 AQMs

Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com> Fri, 11 December 2020 21:10 UTC

Return-Path: <martin.h.duke@gmail.com>
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 29DFC3A0EEF for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Dec 2020 13:10:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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=gmail.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 2ZLYPj_1_ziy for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Dec 2020 13:10:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-il1-x133.google.com (mail-il1-x133.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::133]) (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 9F8AC3A0EEC for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Dec 2020 13:10:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-il1-x133.google.com with SMTP id b8so10047679ila.13 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Dec 2020 13:10:48 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=a0UddwQqA0OfN2cFv0T6impN5eLA/riI4QtX2HkCJns=; b=dS9DiVpntEPANPXrYSpU1iRavXa0Lt+K8Y0Ru2OZBAk1p8leLKMgXF9jdtFgjNemlL cMmieknYTkZj+uSqnAPTUPOSAsQYAURLTsV2RWkoTsirrrQFUjoOoyFJk3n0t0kNDQCt SoJXXfOR234/dg4f//DMRSI0an07sdoEYJDy+509DkF81uoA0qfE5deirLj4oB52x4Ku Dbdbr6RQSPp2fUOE8t1IW1Qx9t9lkk1reelhmbt5XZHtZzycMCY5gi9IDBxdeF3WJ6k/ OeQdOguOeUBKf6OVl9wKlHNiBeEWFRKslbr+d5ednazIRthvAAHLYU/yyeWCqJ3wvI7/ 9Zrw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=a0UddwQqA0OfN2cFv0T6impN5eLA/riI4QtX2HkCJns=; b=JT3Gc5esYLOO7bI5SCfqgejtY7F+wcAszbBIrWhJPafDNgFJkCXQcYJXeGhOm8tjGY C9UjNQ976BPU3Mjzi4z/4Z79r5r37o1QcFUqn1BKpsReK8ymVkEPskAxigg236FVIjkp 0Skp/UU+OCSqLIMlcggOQ3h4cjaP5TUCw1IfhkSsAcQxfGSdwzKG3Bvs9DDQQkdGHT/D fVd4ZjUZ3vBUmn3YJ9UddzYLwZvx04rgciGLho7zWC/mNqpqZ4LJ8kBjLEeZWdq1bv2K l+rN97rOqlBbvnbpfmKKWKRyQnXAjMgtCKOvv9x+UAYEx3jNKvLfJqk9ipWxpTOeJogq tx5Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5331Pj6kypKoQZ3FfROQAIS3eFlZB5rM+ig0tJpy/FvrXPoNrULO Cxhtuv+d0DwojYjiIrfkZ7sx1Xm+NciXbjzY0eM=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyX2ogYBC2HKguNcQdBZgQlXEJ6s3QsXVhxF6PSAnPGpOHyLvnaAAjRes6RwNC7LAtTaxoyQWcmdL1M5EU3KOY=
X-Received: by 2002:a92:155b:: with SMTP id v88mr17662628ilk.303.1607721047701; Fri, 11 Dec 2020 13:10:47 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <125328289.3455959.1607381048136.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <125328289.3455959.1607381048136@mail.yahoo.com> <3F562A25-F4F2-4335-9ED7-54299500B8F6@cablelabs.com> <a35cf206-2fc7-c60e-c713-c4f916106bde@bobbriscoe.net> <CAM4esxQQe4MJsU3ZvdVWVeSC6z+YWCytDd3i2im27qhnss1_og@mail.gmail.com> <CACL_3VE_FD7wdwXGgbYsBnj0+ox-m6s6V=uZVaVZdgK-fLT2KQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CACL_3VE_FD7wdwXGgbYsBnj0+ox-m6s6V=uZVaVZdgK-fLT2KQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2020 13:10:36 -0800
Message-ID: <CAM4esxT1SjveX3AKbOcfjD317ojTNsxfgk84OAQ7=6v-YjQDow@mail.gmail.com>
To: "C. M. Heard" <heard@pobox.com>
Cc: TSVWG <tsvwg@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000f23fb905b636b992"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/0e-aLDDgDpB1Kd39Pzx0Nwa3dHQ>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] L4S and the detection of RFC3168 AQMs
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, 11 Dec 2020 21:10:50 -0000

My understanding of 3168 is that only in-window data packets are marked
ECT(0). A zero-length segment is a equivalent to a pure ACK, which is not
marked.

On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 12:09 PM C. M. Heard <heard@pobox.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 11:51 AM Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> This falls under the "much easier to do in other transports" category,
>> where I could just send a PING or HEARTBEAT marked ECT(0) to test the queue
>> in mid-connection, without affecting the latency of anything that matters.
>> But in the TCP case, I'm not sure how to resolve Bob's second objection
>> (running ECT(0) for a long time would be unacceptable).
>>
>
> Could zero-length TCP segments be used instead of PING or HEARTBEAT?
>
> Mike Heard
>

v2.30.2 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status