Re: [tsvwg] [Ecn-sane] Compatibility with singlw queue RFC3168 AQMs

Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> Wed, 07 August 2019 08:41 UTC

Return-Path: <swmike@swm.pp.se>
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 B94B4120044 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Aug 2019 01:41:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.299
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.299 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_MED=-2.3, 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 (1024-bit key) header.d=swm.pp.se
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 2TsTiiYL3hwU for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Aug 2019 01:41:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (swm.pp.se [212.247.200.143]) (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 AE891120043 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 7 Aug 2019 01:41:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id 5A4BFB4; Wed, 7 Aug 2019 10:41:33 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=swm.pp.se; s=mail; t=1565167293; bh=OqY5aYFf4zsOg59/B4RkHPN3IzoB+y9Dxgirf+yuaYQ=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=3h1KLpxRyqA18M/BRYccu36gm8rgKHJJzkoIeORwhSoHOSYoM4b8xUP1Ij2owhEZq xsWvcNZiqPG6xMyzsFrsetiU5/d1G4pWlk4NHHPiezVSPWENfyaWWZF5K9/59mYUbF DrMizvxQJoHtQVt3iISVojGvzI5IeEnaPtxuBsts=
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58375B1; Wed, 7 Aug 2019 10:41:33 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 10:41:33 +0200 (CEST)
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>
cc: "Black, David" <David.Black@dell.com>, "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>, Bob Briscoe <ietf@bobbriscoe.net>, "ecn-sane@lists.bufferbloat.net" <ecn-sane@lists.bufferbloat.net>, Dave Taht <dave@taht.net>, "De Schepper, Koen (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)" <koen.de_schepper@nokia-bell-labs.com>
In-Reply-To: <9C42D7E8-734A-4620-B95B-5FFDDF1D3D95@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1908071036090.21828@uplift.swm.pp.se>
References: <364514D5-07F2-4388-A2CD-35ED1AE38405@akamai.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> <e1660988-3651-0c3b-cdc1-5518f067e42e@bobbriscoe.net> <4B02593C-E67F-4587-8B7E-9127D029AED9@gmx.de> <34e3b1b0-3c4c-bb6a-82c1-89ac14d5fd2c@bobbriscoe.net> <E031B993-DAAF-4BE4-A542-33C44310D6E9@gmx.de> <77522c07-6f2e-2491-ba0e-cbef62aad194@bobbriscoe.net> <619092c0-640f-56c2-19c9-1cc486180c8b@bobbriscoe.net> <3A454B00-AEBC-48B6-9A8A-922C66E884A7@gmx.de> <21E40F44-2151-4565-970E-E1CEBE975036@gmx.de> <CE03DB3D7B45C245BCA0D243277949363063EA1C@MX307CL04.corp.emc.com> <58F8052E-A56B-4E1F-8E1D-CBE75A0F7332@akamai.com> <CE03DB3D7B45C245BCA0D2432779493630640036@MX307CL04.corp.emc.com> <9C42D7E8-734A-4620-B95B-5FFDDF1D3D95@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07)
Organization: People's Front Against WWW
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/6tRrufgVuaDtVFrp9Ii2E8xbX2g>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] [Ecn-sane] Compatibility with singlw queue 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: Wed, 07 Aug 2019 08:41:38 -0000

On Fri, 26 Jul 2019, Jonathan Morton wrote:

> Based on our post-session discussions, I feel that it may not actually 
> be entirely clear to the L4S people just how serious the situation with 
> L4S and Codel is.

My take on all of this is that whatever we come up with needs to be 
incrementally deployable on an Internet that has everything from stupid 
huge FIFOs to FQ_CODEL to whatever else might be out there, and there 
should be no huge pathological downsides of deployment that causes 
widespread degradation/collapse of anything currently being in wider use 
on the Internet.

In 5-10 years we're still going to have all kinds of AQMs and stupid huge 
FIFOs still in wide use.

So I'd like to see robust testing done for all proposals to see that they 
work properly on everything from GSM EDGE to ADSL to FQ_CODEL and 
dual-queue whatever we come up with together with commonly used traffic 
types on the Internet today, elastic and non-elastic.

I realise this is problematic and gets in the way of progress but the 
Internet is a messy place and we need to do mitigation of pathological 
cases where new and old don't always play nice together.

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se