Re: [tsvwg] sce vs l4s comparison plots?

"alex.burr@ealdwulf.org.uk" <alex.burr@ealdwulf.org.uk> Mon, 11 November 2019 11:41 UTC

Return-Path: <alex.burr@ealdwulf.org.uk>
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 254FB120100 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Nov 2019 03:41:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.119
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.119 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=yahoo.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 17LcXdukUgGB for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Nov 2019 03:41:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sonic308-1.consmr.mail.bf2.yahoo.com (sonic308-1.consmr.mail.bf2.yahoo.com [74.6.130.40]) (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 1F6FD1200FA for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Nov 2019 03:41:10 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s2048; t=1573472469; bh=jXWSMpzSOYnCReeFFZX13eVV+5t1aJ32/HmvwYVOn/U=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:From:Subject; b=joK6JvLk6y0ZeiJBtdoXzH9WtaBkQuqmRX/7oU+H5qW/gKNblTGO3+o+hRBdjEcGEQM9B9uUg1fqgTuTA/0BKBkQhIpu8tOmee92QLeWPVJVJ1UaL48eUYFMQ4E9X0wdEs1SrFrz4BnNHFKmT/EFV31kKj/l+2qAtX3kLIdEAKUXfqaQljv2rot2J+r0yDrgmTwsGfGxzfccDGwGiAmHngSIF6h9raDdP/KPZf6fZ++RZb9fHewZHv2ox7xkqIqy5PeqaT5shoyRbFSHh30ac0/3sOICvntkfukucIg1xWXVGc5RwtT8I4Sa0AnDzNdI1RbFiXVEEjtf1boYm0q8Mw==
X-YMail-OSG: iS75k8YVM1koQ6QdvgH6UrGUhLVD_xB9HXMj.s7VBNwuF3vwfS1x_jvDs1JFnUI rScYkDUbECaMo1ZZdZrMLMhfRKK0wIEerX_s_Wsd241JoTbZjU6Jjxf4409a8P535ibleaNi9FKj INdWEWvMaCAWZB3dnkvbdWH4Lr9jH3T0PbGcssYN4IPbDcR9NaljosXVSE5jcCePkeV.ExqRh4d5 i8OLIU.TD5PFx6j.BpykLL6tf90CLuK9zwJwUUQs5smdzZJG2fYx4YqoSzqGhOUY2B6okLpK8Bbb mgEFpfU3xx6akiwyhoWf3U7dS4BRI.JNW4ArmZhRBRnmowYQU_c66DvJgzGM2S3yMY0IQLp2aFZW JPhtE1OubKQvIuWNWt2f2jlVQYpcN5gggdcJkypL78j6sv2ziiutYUTBX9qSLKLVLADOhILq8I3j 1n2xFNuGvjvewzy0rhJ92SwAtVjpIWiccygiO5sUuhU8yBd1xEF7scCKcdVQwoz970u5sH.53Gko nQO2bRM9dtdf61D.6FIDXx_nH4qN_7BuMNt1cBujrnIMofc7LAPypivb3KRflpfByhlNUDhorZuG 7h9fmbvMZXdTe6jhdaDr8UVpdcq1xjRhUCaXt4ctv9dSpV1p4SmvyGTnvVWe18trsxhpBIobZp7m KiTRvaaS.5eEhMJuFdSbpPeENiklCnGJlZUVOPu3p4BrkvbjYKO5VnWzXBsBIlcxvd8le8zsfHxw S_VRCSB7o358U9UhPhcSnBWjmP8inah.KLIZMV_bdBx11Yofj55G7Hvdm4HTdujCjfaUlwDQ5dLU ItH47cxW9PTQPCy7mf51RfYKkONfqQvUWBjfSVPux_f.34CSpT9Z31ySFdF4l9d2J6pKEfxpk8i. Oa5uDXgUkO3HWXoR9rDuuRPuFckJGBBDVgPqed17ltGc.H9_M7615Fjtbqvv4a92X8jYZIDBizy2 mIxkInYKqDydKsYS26slp4QC7CkiKLO0dFW.06ZuWzpE_fhk5ms3MXe6_VWtazFlR1hAQjSvSXEE CwAKXQgLkHFVIlX6YUYdh9ceS.ywYwg2dw9RTl9ro1xxwaTbn.kjmWyjl0Mw.rwd1J1e96Ou3HBF 3OqXaYzGgXboeoA3nIj_PKjnMzwLvI.5H9uRdxRNOCTVhd4n8x6gZ1VdTqaI1CoVICmNW63m.NGn b5cSwpieKQhqb6c3C3n0R3C4MhHXcYNEx14fkCQbTOQp9M0n_ciGQOPT9d8ixogRrzezjxipruIk DBIeLKSAJhUlb.Q6gvassWGKo_LrqHzRWzoO9C1oWiK0FrJP8KtkEkeaUZPn1c30qpVwrTks_dJ8 xLqDOeZ2klAcHWA5yWdiK9AxZx3SL
Received: from sonic.gate.mail.ne1.yahoo.com by sonic308.consmr.mail.bf2.yahoo.com with HTTP; Mon, 11 Nov 2019 11:41:09 +0000
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2019 11:41:05 +0000 (UTC)
From: "alex.burr@ealdwulf.org.uk" <alex.burr@ealdwulf.org.uk>
Reply-To: "alex.burr@ealdwulf.org.uk" <alex.burr@ealdwulf.org.uk>
To: Tom Henderson <tomh@tomh.org>, Dave Taht <dave@taht.net>
Cc: tcpm@ietf.org, tsvwg IETF list <tsvwg@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <1369738724.1583995.1573472465758@mail.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <87a7931d1k.fsf@taht.net>
References: <742142FB-6233-4048-931B-EE2DD9024454@gmx.de> <87mud4ejl9.fsf@taht.net> <4b67d594-e4fc-92d8-fcdc-8384fcb7286b@tomh.org> <87a7931d1k.fsf@taht.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_1583994_884109654.1573472465757"
X-Mailer: WebService/1.1.14680 YMailNorrin Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/60.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/ctIbsKWFOqa8f9jmubwmMwzMVG8>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] sce vs l4s comparison plots?
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, 11 Nov 2019 11:41:13 -0000

 (see below)

    On Monday, November 11, 2019, 12:19:26 AM GMT, Dave Taht <dave@taht.net> wrote:  
 

Cool. If only the dsl and cable worlds had adopted this! it allows for
much smarter handling of packet delivery higher in the stack at the cost
of one interrupt's worth of standing queue. Without BQL we wouldn't be
scaling linux past 10GigE today.

I keep hoping *switches* will start doing bql, also.

[AB] at the CO end (ie downstream) my understanding (which may be out of date) 
is that DSL ICs usually punt queuing to a switch IC. There's a standard (G999.1) which existssolely to enable this (it provides per-subscriber backpressure over ethernet). So, switches doingBQL is exactly what would be required for dsl to do BQL (in the downstream direction).
(Given BQL is a workaround, switches would want to implement a direct solution if they do anything).
Alex