IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tsvwg] [Ecn-sane] is FQ actually widely deployed?

Jonathan Foulkes <jfoulkes@evenroute.com> Mon, 22 July 2019 22:14 UTC

Return-Path: <jfoulkes@evenroute.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 8BDCF1200B8 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 15:14:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=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=g001.emailsrvr.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 Wc-_jfaBB427 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 15:14:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp66.iad3b.emailsrvr.com (smtp66.iad3b.emailsrvr.com [146.20.161.66]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 18BCD1200B1 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 15:14:20 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=g001.emailsrvr.com; s=20190322-9u7zjiwi; t=1563833659; bh=ewY+hhXyMiT3baG6wAg9Nl+az/MdXAbBe4a7GlHQ4Lg=; h=Subject:From:Date:To:From; b=Q38PjXJ0lfkcIbVH7HY3Hg0dLvhiQWx0ntuJm7q0ZxD05QeF7pPFlgipFQ60oDYqA QdbtyYmlSVnG9qa10M9jFilTPFlJkxb5RWp5A2kcovnbRyRwmcv/o20U6EBd0gt2Ka 4iJ2xoOE3O1YRpkU1/0lSNVvvppmtXKLMvBj99lM=
X-Auth-ID: jfoulkes@evenroute.com
Received: by smtp9.relay.iad3b.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: jfoulkes-AT-evenroute.com) with ESMTPSA id EA12F201ED; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 18:14:18 -0400 (EDT)
X-Sender-Id: jfoulkes@evenroute.com
Received: from jonathans-mbp-2.lan (h22.210.20.98.static.ip.windstream.net [98.20.210.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384) by 0.0.0.0:25 (trex/5.7.12); Mon, 22 Jul 2019 18:14:19 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
From: Jonathan Foulkes <jfoulkes@evenroute.com>
In-Reply-To: <CEECD0B0-7081-42DE-AA2C-5061749C9232@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 18:14:16 -0400
Cc: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>, Dave Taht <dave@taht.net>, "ecn-sane@lists.bufferbloat.net" <ecn-sane@lists.bufferbloat.net>, "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <63F4DD93-21EF-41D5-ABCB-9982D6ACB7D9@evenroute.com>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1907221609330.19225@uplift.swm.pp.se> <CEECD0B0-7081-42DE-AA2C-5061749C9232@gmail.com>
To: Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/D3Tz7Bhc_Rbg8eU6aw-6ULPS_hM>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 06:21:09 -0700
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] [Ecn-sane] is FQ actually widely deployed?
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: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 22:15:32 -0000

> The IQrouter is probably the best example of a commercial middlebox that does FQ, in this case using Cake.  I hear that it is now being sold in re-branded form to certain large ISPs, but I could be wrong about that.  I've CC'd Jonathan Foulkes for comment.

I wish I could get some ‘large ISPs’ to pay attention, as they have some of the worst issues. But our ISP base is mostly smaller, rural ISPs with the usual challenges using legacy copper or older DOCSIS deployments. But I have also seen benefits on many a higher-capacity, modern infrastructure. Not sure how they allow bloat on some of the setups, but they do, and a CPE with a decent AQM (like Cake) makes a measurable difference.

Since this is also going to the ecn-sane list, let me say that having an AQM that is ECN-aware (like Cake with the ECN flags enabled) is major win for user-experience, as when combined with modern OSs that respect ECN, the immediate reaction to the congestion signaling is wonderful. Also nice that tests like the DSLreports.com speedtest, who grade packet-loss (the usual congestion signaling) as ‘Quality’ now consistently grade lines as an A in that metric with ECN signaling. 

Regards,

Jonathan Foulkes
CEO - Evenroute.com

> On Jul 22, 2019, at 11:20 AM, Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 22 Jul, 2019, at 10:14 am, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> wrote:
>> 
>> Do we have numbers on how much FQ is actually out there? If we don't, can we measure it? Anyone know of devices shipping or being designed that does FQ of some kind?
> 
> Linux and OSX end hosts now routinely run fq_codel by default.  That's an awfully large installed base, both of FQ and of Codel.  It is perhaps worth observing that these are rarely bottlenecks for Internet paths, though they might be for LAN paths.
> 
> The IQrouter is probably the best example of a commercial middlebox that does FQ, in this case using Cake.  I hear that it is now being sold in re-branded form to certain large ISPs, but I could be wrong about that.  I've CC'd Jonathan Foulkes for comment.
> 
> There's also a large French ISP which has done fq_codel on its last mile for quite some time.
> 
> - Jonathan Morton

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email