Re: [tsvwg] path forward on L4S issue #16

Ingemar Johansson S <ingemar.s.johansson@ericsson.com> Thu, 18 June 2020 05:15 UTC

Return-Path: <ingemar.s.johansson@ericsson.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 22F163A0965 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Jun 2020 22:15:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.102
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.102 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, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-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=ericsson.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 PO0UngLf4vRK for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Jun 2020 22:15:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from EUR04-DB3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr60053.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.6.53]) (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 0B00D3A0E51 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Jun 2020 22:15:17 -0700 (PDT)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=L3GnMcATTWTB/2qpP+VmyenUpQo50JqfO6J/2lwVG279xUcRSzZ2DYTRtsJBp4/flIXv8So75U6n9wcovYXO91MgPUOUHLnRFS0yQL+sFOJV4Qb6CsiW/D4ukzgh0zo0LFIBlg1lOT546O5WwGW12bIWs5iVw8ADbm9uqH8Un3I4zkHMrkuAV/RTrMtL5kavCflSZOyVxmdjg1vC1EYYSVJO82UMioov777ov9p+A2ttc6Fl55elYzJ5bzz0mVX5kLVDW6NklD45dvHuQQwSvwjK4z230/3Dh/w5CPYfp9x+WEDBoe/NTjCIBS4Y/+HB57HdoD2UizGJEheScflb5w==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=LWH46XSq1xu/RTHizaKTAfKJDQJ28K1fEm4wP43PLiE=; b=J3H/48Lz6aWseaYMiuwLWaJ6DLG4ZpL99ZzwWyXb+jKoxB+sk7rg8PvkiwxgZSE+uTpngVGg5x99Crcf94FbYwQQ32h4NJzZLUSiko9a6a1MkPoTJ0b+lZlW+n8Z1HR2k/J6DCzFa/1PKCmZox31lWFqgnqZ8+6umYj64NQKl2nm57ZsvotnQ9aMcO98/Ylv+riDyZlcnIUbZdG3axGfvcLtyWdzlMsM+Y4R1NiWvqAqIOMKxHu4B75JGe2SpW7M4r+Dj1rVHPeyw2kEwYLe8lnYpo7z5gGCilLWibfnNIHQT4JsFSW6+h4EDkZ9UZqp0rpSAfxOlao6bfkWQo7/+g==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ericsson.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=ericsson.com; dkim=pass header.d=ericsson.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ericsson.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=LWH46XSq1xu/RTHizaKTAfKJDQJ28K1fEm4wP43PLiE=; b=P2v5kv60c1XJHsLVlQDF2+3uALXi4gIPRc5afQUepv/I1w4hIIYDx/JDwQIyl8eHNErqHAFKZRk6Q/57euasg5SvQZEYypKYKcoDeHPR7DOfmO7wGafo0VmeYghXzA7YTjVWztKUY7n8JHvQAyNDs+aMUV4qLyJQpiREFGs5PrI=
Received: from HE1PR0701MB2876.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:3:56::8) by HE1PR0702MB3659.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:7:8c::33) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3109.15; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 05:15:14 +0000
Received: from HE1PR0701MB2876.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::f411:8f72:4035:41d1]) by HE1PR0701MB2876.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::f411:8f72:4035:41d1%8]) with mapi id 15.20.3109.018; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 05:15:13 +0000
From: Ingemar Johansson S <ingemar.s.johansson@ericsson.com>
To: "Holland, Jake" <jholland@akamai.com>, "Rodney W. Grimes" <ietf@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>, Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>
CC: "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>, Ingemar Johansson S <ingemar.s.johansson@ericsson.com>
Thread-Topic: [tsvwg] path forward on L4S issue #16
Thread-Index: AQHWPkYZyJNg6cgsQkOoRWoF9Fsxh6jQUFNQgAAFjoCAAAT/IIAABjQAgAAXTICAACKkgIAAFF2AgACvbJCAABzFAIAAByHAgABOV4CAAA2VUIAILGgAgALBbRCAABXrAIAABaAAgAAQBmCAAGNeAIAAggOw
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2020 05:15:13 +0000
Message-ID: <HE1PR0701MB28761E5639C0E5813DCEA21EC29B0@HE1PR0701MB2876.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
References: <2DC5C89B-C979-4354-98D7-BBDBC78A42B1@gmail.com> <202006171419.05HEJClG085550@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> <HE1PR0701MB287641121218FC0AA72F56B0C29A0@HE1PR0701MB2876.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <7B7C1BEC-9DBB-410E-BDFB-3337E071CA86@akamai.com>
In-Reply-To: <7B7C1BEC-9DBB-410E-BDFB-3337E071CA86@akamai.com>
Accept-Language: sv-SE, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: akamai.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;akamai.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=ericsson.com;
x-originating-ip: [192.176.1.83]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: f9830826-1596-4c68-ce43-08d8134694e9
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: HE1PR0702MB3659:
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <HE1PR0702MB3659D3DC7DAD7AF6E226665DC29B0@HE1PR0702MB3659.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:2512;
x-forefront-prvs: 0438F90F17
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: DWpqCRlQZ+1rLyyuMu4u2bsbhauQ6ej383KhxVK6fLUicI/GNeNROcBtYzw85UTB0/olYFiQhtGs10jV9VdhcszjH+UUnVmbTG07oMW0+b9JzA8qi7XA2/yimA05plLgHvz28Hm7kLYjn+kRWfMJd7pYxkkrpY5bwM389uI/Kdu+6oIwRaKe53MB/lPMM2MmMizMQZni2JpxsQmJK2dnB0vB5Q6BIYkQy1RwVknqX4daBLfzp/e/iJk7fDLN8GlycgA3zmBJ3ZsEZkEDkYZGtF3SJNxRLSekNk7sIOo5wuNqLVuCDaG6Faflp5yGlE5UYrK8l+8heaEnt2Mb11SQ3A==
x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:HE1PR0701MB2876.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFTY:; SFS:(4636009)(136003)(396003)(376002)(366004)(346002)(39860400002)(99936003)(54906003)(86362001)(83380400001)(33656002)(186003)(53546011)(7696005)(6506007)(110136005)(316002)(71200400001)(26005)(478600001)(8676002)(8936002)(55016002)(4326008)(52536014)(9686003)(66616009)(64756008)(66446008)(66556008)(66476007)(107886003)(76116006)(5660300002)(66946007)(2906002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101;
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: ChQbOMu3uFXNsh/G3m/oLyaG1ZWsLYmfzvV5vvuB30izwv617Z0k44MH+cp7w8oWpBzzB6e/Rs5PbDd3F0utf4u31cmswYD3tfbmjiviZu1kOHKzPtG1UNV0ew6y0kmhpIBmcN2/rSvfnhdV3ee9QRIzFN+T95YE1aP/MzcDXeivqhBImA9j3OQ/xivLhYzPQ/fmuxv8v06X52jND5CHtbwx+wLU6A/x93o6+znUd5FfhsA1fMVc9sh49VNj0MVgfr0C+46hP9IROjJNLYcGW60smAmdx46XGUfQUiA4xJGonsKba7O13taRlqUaeWbxQJTEoYL0WzwRfsB+ZPqYlLnzSaq5b6XjjoGIB4azi6TWx3svSOxm4mctskHtWO+jsYHiovVvi/7MFcnOfcVSR4MgUditnFOJpGa8EWK0YD3cmYWPtmu1eQF3ni8T3qKy5SjU92MLoegSFhKfgi08cq35HeEctMMbRICSNDdAUAA=
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/x-pkcs7-signature"; micalg=SHA1; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00CA_01D64540.34B85F10"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: ericsson.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: f9830826-1596-4c68-ce43-08d8134694e9
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 18 Jun 2020 05:15:13.8644 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 92e84ceb-fbfd-47ab-be52-080c6b87953f
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: UkSAcL4isu8Gt+e6jiZ3PtcP+4WWj7bH/RsjLzRjYNRu/vlUqpYoDtb3souQATi+TlqSYbXsy7e6t/nOtKQfOq6Q0TW6HpPHA6BOqp2XwqerOZJD5v8dtmf0EsldgcxK
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: HE1PR0702MB3659
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/S4LdXErUYcEl04-hETPSoGTTR2g>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] path forward on L4S issue #16
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: Thu, 18 Jun 2020 05:15:20 -0000

Hi

Thanks Jake, this clarifies things in this respect. 
I believe/hope that larger content providers and ISPs can be easier to address with operator guidelines that Wesley (David?) suggested, and that can perhaps work as we see a reasonably good industry support behind L4S. And after all a decision to bleach ECT(1) need to be preceded by some kind of investigation about the options ?
Individuals that install custom CPEs are a more uncertain element of course. We discussed this a bit in this thread, there are possibilities as well as challenges here.

With that said, I believe that it is now fair that I do a multiplicative decrease and give this group a chance to breathe 😊

/Ingemar

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Holland, Jake <jholland@akamai.com>
> Sent: den 17 juni 2020 23:12
> To: Ingemar Johansson S
> <ingemar.s.johansson=40ericsson.com@dmarc.ietf.org>rg>; Rodney W. Grimes
> <ietf@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>et>; Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>om>;
> Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>
> Cc: Ingemar Johansson S <ingemar.s.johansson@ericsson.com>om>;
> tsvwg@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [tsvwg] path forward on L4S issue #16
> 
> Hi Ingemar,
> 
> One clarification:
> 
> On 6/17/20, 9:27 AM, "Ingemar Johansson S"
> <ingemar.s.johansson=40ericsson.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> > So far I see only one firm evidence that RFC3168 AQMs are deployed and
> > enabled and these are related to the OpenWrt project, manifested in a
> > few upgradeable devices (and some not upgradeable) that can be bought
> > in retail stores. The rest is unconfirmed.
> 
> If you're referring to the observations I sent, they are not linked to
> OpenWRT.  I was looking at Akamai production traffic that saw ECE marks
> while delivering content to end users.
> 
> Although many of the marking devices were likely CPE devices deployed by
> individual end users, there's reason to believe that several ISPs (what looks
> like a growing number) have some kind of managed deployment that has a
> much greater prevalence within their ASN than can be easily explained by
> individual users installing a custom CPE.
> 
> I don't have any information on whether the marking devices inside these
> wider deployments within specific ASNs are predominantly CPE devices or
> whether they're one of the many routers or access devices that support CE-
> marking that they have now chosen to enable, after historically running it
> disabled.  (This is not implausible, because the amount of traffic that will
> respond to the marks has changed substantially in the last few years.)
> 
> HTH.
> 
> Best regards,
> Jake
>