Re: [tsvwg] feedback and thoughts L4S / SCE

Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> Sat, 28 November 2020 17:06 UTC

Return-Path: <moeller0@gmx.de>
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 05D943A0BAD for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 28 Nov 2020 09:06:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.649
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.649 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=gmx.net
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 X5JU74I2Flah for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 28 Nov 2020 09:06:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.21]) (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 D61673A0AF9 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Sat, 28 Nov 2020 09:06:39 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1606583193; bh=54788ihbhfy5Aru4wpsDJoV18myrwMJhQKKTNXCqYsY=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=BtyzmCMakBm2aa9j3bZkrFp8JHcZI6HtVCkNFFxmix2Frw1xpT2kyRI0Q95lsnHv1 9d/T9SB9HTbZl5rUvRnI6sZvXgFeFseNC1hMJhgnVtC5k5B15TVSlvF7yqJyme0UuZ /cZg+zieqIwxek6nVmtoVbR7/H8NhbjWe4zio+28=
X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c
Received: from [192.168.42.229] ([77.1.27.60]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx105 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MQeA2-1kWUu71vZ0-00Nigg; Sat, 28 Nov 2020 18:06:33 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.17\))
From: Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.2011281723120.26384@uplift.swm.pp.se>
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2020 18:06:31 +0100
Cc: Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>, tsvwg@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <F90BE995-D10A-4FE9-AC57-8C1490DBF2A9@gmx.de>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.20.2011201413100.26384@uplift.swm.pp.se> <9B5474B3-4384-4A20-81C3-5251246AA594@gmx.de> <alpine.DEB.2.20.2011221548210.26384@uplift.swm.pp.se> <066C60AF-39A3-41EF-B9E9-938AA1A707F5@gmx.de> <alpine.DEB.2.20.2011281512350.26384@uplift.swm.pp.se> <5A423905-EFD9-4A93-AB46-BACF61FE2D2D@gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.20.2011281658380.26384@uplift.swm.pp.se> <BDB27AE9-0A35-441D-B18F-5CD7C2903AF8@gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.20.2011281723120.26384@uplift.swm.pp.se>
To: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.17)
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:3/idKET/GnLLiH+Esb8tx44+CwnuiPKSBKeMolnyGgX9n+753JB kp853LAg2C3wjRGXQu4coI2l40eUvXBVTjPhB5GO+4y/Oe8VgPTYsMidZt1mJUYQHH1nntP Nb6beKiFuekTaTRwYsqD78wGjmydMfZorezDYYQkSklFeMAj31zzsDHNDcSs5iprUKKYTWF yxGAnBWDD87nh1wli/1yA==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:nKR/FSrZH1Y=:6IiOdzunZdSPDWsHZx0Rdd RktKC+pU2oQZDPg/60730G9zsYCxWruY725av/SZbyI2V+1iid3RhvBs9hi9qpucpoB5s1mRD F2+oy5GSwX2PFv9VZlWabLbNQ+xmMlGLFobJEs0Y8k68zUxy4oVdoJWYiKpn8o7xXqGaSwclM yTrjhfb20K8xeMGbXcRvqViZgpzHXfTvVN8Y+wLP5qEeuQuDFf+9rJ0UbPITLHTVYLBh2nZ5i vm9GIeAXiEakopemr0q1Agr7BEi7twbf0TTKD9PLER9WcoftSuiX3o2O4GujRDl7hrPsYx+O9 muigxtfX2YiWT2PoF6Wa9KCRocRphHSdC/D5RIfX7qKtvmirhBGiGQHlOJnUAlAdqOAJpZMIg +Sh7+mrMnCOqQhBo1Ea6KNceKsq8hi1vWQLJQEAg//qHwOVc0JfYqZgt2FJtndoQxctJcjne0 XcCiOGIiHoEFF6tUHXQhMa83L93uNLb2YONhfYLHb2n3Q1wJp0bMvwRFiltpto8UbWc2PcrTI 4utTk+6/h1mFa/CiZj5A8V1rquck8bq3aqcitmEQyMMs+SRp7pVka2H4S0ONw6VbLTGP9Kr+u LsaQo5DOqzZ+VhJGVKLaWNR9mDRdjJnp97Y6F1DFl1PZ91ZbxcYGc8qR1WuzkCTLFfC3E0Vhv 29sXTtLZWnT1/gO0THqmLYbefF9VYPa5jSbF/qfzNSORU5ApMER4e2GRoQVxG6CRVjuHEiEm9 JsEr0lJdwH+cFzGky2NIEL0QHXKf8eXW/SRUJM8nz0HohgwNALLi7rw5JqpfvYdzFKYL0avtJ oy8k0h0+xdOAu/inImNSAQ7jRTBbZ9Tlswt/vX1f7JoiGS4eG6bM5vXfrIK4Z+0SYtd/md389 Mkle4wVEkGkfFmjl8PyQ==
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/dkE_aK7zXFovy1JRsS-Rusgp-Nw>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] feedback and thoughts L4S / SCE
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: Sat, 28 Nov 2020 17:06:42 -0000

Hi Mikael,

I actually wanted to stay out of tis sub thread, but...


> On Nov 28, 2020, at 17:24, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> wrote:
> 
> On Sat, 28 Nov 2020, Jonathan Morton wrote:
> 
>> Take a random sampling of CPE devices, and see how many of them use the above - or it might be easier to count the ones that don't.  I'll wait.
> 
> My ubiquiti APs come with it, but it's default turned off.
> 
> It's not only important of the devices have the capability, it also needs to be default turned on so it's actually used (considering most people don't change config much).

	[SM] ... if end-user devices have such capabilities, the big ISPs that in all likelihood are the biggest buyers of such devices, should have little issues adding that to their requirements list for their purchases and making sure devices are configured properly, without driving up the costs unduly, no?. 
	The fact that that has not happened is in itself a rather clear indication that ISPs are really not that interested in tackling latency under load (and why should they, often unhappy users will switch to a higher/more profitable speed tier in a well-intended but not very effective attempt at improving a link's usefulness).
	Now, for end-users that is a different issue, and there are quite some, often on-line gamers interested in reducing their internet access link's latency, that are actually willing to buy and configure boutique devices, like the NetDUMA, or more down to earth and less hyped (but IMHO even more capable) evenroute's iqrouter. Incidentally, both are basically software distributions for relative standard existing router's from other manufacturers, and yet people are paying a premium to get those better behaving router OS, as latency under load performance of stock router OSes often is not "cutting it"...
	
	I note that L4S never reached out to those end-users actually caring for low latency... instead they are trying to convince the ISP market, without a narrative how this is going to imprive an ISP's bottom-line (the you need to do this to not fall behind the competition, is not a positive selling point IMHO).

Best Regards
	Sebastian