Re: [tsvwg] Network congestion, dynamic lossless compression?

Jonathan Morton <> Sat, 03 August 2019 18:34 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68AB61200D6 for <>; Sat, 3 Aug 2019 11:34:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 3.087
X-Spam-Level: ***
X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.087 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_SBL_CSS=3.335, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=1.5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0Vnw9DbKAD_z for <>; Sat, 3 Aug 2019 11:34:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::135]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 377DC12000E for <>; Sat, 3 Aug 2019 11:34:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id v16so1286729lfg.11 for <>; Sat, 03 Aug 2019 11:34:31 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=Wg0NMihtWenUBNKBqcTP5CKsg/sMFjNO3mcRIG/tUwg=; b=gooS1xqea0zbJKZN1vEGkfsBqsuCd7RFdbHMn3wDr9Ba3GcVF3fwA+mHz3YGRB6qw+ PHTcNjHckGOu36I4AiedSSWwlPuBp20zwQQxO+K2pJnz1QPcLOK5/FJTNOMfXvkJTS5J yuMF957wLnQExRAwy6FEPCPIs2KUNX/cMeS6fNcL4Mg+3nkAHPeOu+rba2mQdsX5BdgT EH8aUxsdS+YdmbJsvfDvboFHmHy1ox0+To2HPBCih1tWfvMBcM2CWtwmXUk9qGOgyDBS aDUOHIxEaIOcIoxMHAHCt3K6/eqETW31ooW5WW6bjtVljQjb8WxrN/XpliulBnLzFGDz C5IA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=Wg0NMihtWenUBNKBqcTP5CKsg/sMFjNO3mcRIG/tUwg=; b=unz4+Stg5uzUQPG0VrlLZ6ZXeWfqEg4WRFTIHC2oUS8KneSPcdErZJkZU7tov8bdB2 RnDErTszwipNVPuCXZNraV5+lDDmijZIB7lOGvXYIW6YeGauNlRxefjJr/lBY6bE9EZA hzh6OtJubQ03WrmDUwkUEIJ0igl/T25JgDVmagK5LXA26AQDrpoHec5FezDR5AfkcmOI GwMiPlTTgUD3JaCLQ9pUyJFj9eJQDvgpjrhaNXlQos7jcbfMroOE18Nle8ELKTj9Hy4D VqishKCSad2OfApqZbRCxmfDW6vV+iDwY0Se9z7mLLVmLe0+2BzHy3h30M3niZDTYU5r ZOCQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAX6HDVEXkvD05mUYsdYumZxV/Wkg4G7WPDbNkPfc8Go33dBUcTo RCYzVzwV/zTSTyXdkFjPcthkVHlT4lE=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwSKrs/K0mPepvTvAv04fV7KvyhwqJYFUawAa8DQCFUHHydYC7wOqxvJQHRlehqSVIdSSIhyQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a19:491d:: with SMTP id w29mr68059186lfa.149.1564857269436; Sat, 03 Aug 2019 11:34:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] ([]) by with ESMTPSA id p13sm15946416ljc.39.2019. (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 03 Aug 2019 11:34:28 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Jonathan Morton <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2019 19:34:00 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
References: <> <>
To: "David G. Pickett" <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] Network congestion, dynamic lossless compression?
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 03 Aug 2019 18:34:33 -0000

> On 3 Aug, 2019, at 6:13 pm, David G. Pickett <> wrote:
> Lossless compression could be applied without any effect on the transmitted data.

The chief problem with that idea is that most data transmitted these days is already compressed and/or encrypted, making it impossible to further compress transparently.  Even Web traffic, which used to be relatively compressible back when PPP options and in-modem compression were more relevant, is now encrypted more often than not (HTTPS replaces HTTP), and the encryption system itself applies compression to reduce exploitable entropy in the plaintext.

In the end, anyone can do better than your suggestion by "just" building a bigger pipe.  But that isn't a solution by itself, because demand grows to meet and exceed supply.  ("The bureaucracy is expanding, to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy.")  To actually improve quality of service in the long run means finding ways to reduce latency and packet loss, not to improve capacity.

 - Jonathan Morton