[tsvwg] L4S Issue #16 Discussion Paper: Fall-back on Classic ECN AQM

Bob Briscoe <ietf@bobbriscoe.net> Tue, 05 November 2019 09:48 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@bobbriscoe.net>
X-Original-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FB3712086C; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 01:48:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=bobbriscoe.net
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sCpEmAsIoOba; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 01:48:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from server.dnsblock1.com (server.dnsblock1.com []) (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 94FCC120869; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 01:48:05 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bobbriscoe.net; s=default; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID: Subject:From:To:Sender:Reply-To:Cc:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=zFjyS4eEVmO9y8qelhLipOcnLcoBmA9xf+WdG8SKm58=; b=gXZ7Lykkw54aaTBduFLmFNqQ6j y8kfd0EPMqBM/1e+WqaPyku+VxLZ1EXQkrdwmdFHa01BB2JL+Qd0FvKTVWIJx5gQCZL1iEbeHMygg swCPLM5FV1iLSmDAtIQMPaqvQxDlun4rHnioGX5osUCCogPipcvt9DtjNVEhN+cXBOAsFr5so5mP7 QNkVHbRB3rHbzWYxy8I37mu4Q3K+a85s1tC3vSi3UfuYt2wNjanb42RygZBDoMDSIKo3l5hXYyYCR cbjcyuYcpNLCHJP2vkzinjHwYCxJZ3piLHNRutFF8VV99zi8eKzLvescBt7JroMndmlnCIhf2F2xM tLXyrL8w==;
Received: from [] (port=48216 helo=[]) by server.dnsblock1.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <ietf@bobbriscoe.net>) id 1iRvRT-0002ro-1F; Tue, 05 Nov 2019 09:48:03 +0000
To: tsvwg IETF list <tsvwg@ietf.org>, iccrg IRTF list <iccrg@irtf.org>, tcpm IETF list <tcpm@ietf.org>
From: Bob Briscoe <ietf@bobbriscoe.net>
Message-ID: <b9f4d7e8-a5a4-84ae-dd75-35e3a73b4fa5@bobbriscoe.net>
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2019 09:48:02 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------D256DA15BBBBD2D8C6BCD7A9"
Content-Language: en-GB
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server.dnsblock1.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - bobbriscoe.net
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: server.dnsblock1.com: authenticated_id: in@bobbriscoe.net
X-Authenticated-Sender: server.dnsblock1.com: in@bobbriscoe.net
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/jpsPNNu892jOcKNKjNR3mG6YgGc>
Subject: [tsvwg] L4S Issue #16 Discussion Paper: Fall-back on Classic ECN AQM
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: Tue, 05 Nov 2019 09:48:07 -0000

tsvwg, iccrg and tcpm folks,

I've published a discussion paper giving rationale and pseudocode for an 
algorithm we are implementing and evaluating in TCP Prague.
TCP Prague Fall-back on Detection of a Classic ECN AQM 

I'd appreciate any immediate concerns with whether it looks feasible 
and/or any scenarios where you think it's likely not to work well.

There's three main components: passive, active and base RTT adjustment.
Only the first may be necessary, or possibly only the second.

We'll publish evaluation results as soon as we have them.

Apologies for not posting as an Internet Draft, but
a) I find LaTeX quicker and more readable esp. for plots;
b) many patent offices consider arXiv (but not Internet Drafts) as 
strong as journal publication

For the avoidance of doubt, I have filed no IPR on this.



Bob Briscoe                               http://bobbriscoe.net/