Re: [tsvwg] [Ecn-sane] is FQ actually widely deployed?
Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> Mon, 22 July 2019 17:09 UTC
Return-Path: <dave.taht@gmail.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 60ECF120296 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 10:09:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
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, FREEMAIL_FROM=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=gmail.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 oLHCEh_MDPP2 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 10:09:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io1-xd41.google.com (mail-io1-xd41.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d41]) (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 1E0E9120305 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 10:09:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io1-xd41.google.com with SMTP id k20so75534145ios.10 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 10:09:31 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=C47meA34Z2d6av98ws+YdKOTMX/7k6sgb0ooGvri99g=; b=S45No43fbLlUheEUGFvFhaGpLO5HSEvHfpx3fjjJxh46g6BFb0myc3/QO5887PSMfE FJ6tVng9oSNT3FTlEWWTQMh8YyBTgQGEMetdgGFh8Fgc0aAkFAkbm5FeNFJUxlDxEtQ4 5IwZVfzmk8EURDzfQf0rS7Q5V8CRqIQjlnMFzkORD0Dg1jhbpNJzbv0apQKJ+ZB0dd09 RksRS1L2LDJaHzxOc/BO4UbYd2ecr37l5rGqJu9IvCtWw8ffcOCJ2lzuUYhIZzAD8Aka +UD+RTQUCaqNlaAnhnbO/ET503sJUNU4YQhhmI522i0fGOQ3NIdpdkEem1fwLIb+UcGK pMFg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=C47meA34Z2d6av98ws+YdKOTMX/7k6sgb0ooGvri99g=; b=Sr1myQvOdOOjDJq4/13lodiIV+pLEM+IVKHx0nM60gtB7stvQV4YF2H1UQzT/odvCT sO6IRPraEUq0mdPAzOcZL6BRZIIwfRSjpRLDFeCroGm3i20CubUU2l0tIIvt4PXrW7+S H/NBkFIUkRdclMK87qXipsp4MpVTOiUmhCS2x3GRx6d+T8hIrDt4RyQjYlKER98zPB7M dewVF9L6LzQ7lqaxFhyGXioUNRjRLl+GsyJ0DROjZUG/VaJvBbI8Mqn47M5fm1LjHES1 04i4vtvzaUEdXuXU+Ngn1KLCPNP9WC2CfUyBgf7QbQFkYW2YjUFvtWnJ2J4yGAr9rUSN CZWA==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUk+SmolP6h9KlCARvHFojGJKZIyMQ9STNd5Hs2rupjUkMoA7nF rZpZ2s0u0kvHaN70NiAgRATu2K+bLWaX5x04KHj2JubT
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzS0IrlqlEM5AVY2FENSxtfn/BQi+++Ywei7ClN0VpeBh0MIV/lOFpNi4JRpa7SJmqdo4vaMfOyWaeDtmU1jYw=
X-Received: by 2002:a5e:8b43:: with SMTP id z3mr63810902iom.287.1563815369634; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 10:09:29 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1907221609330.19225@uplift.swm.pp.se>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1907221609330.19225@uplift.swm.pp.se>
From: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 10:09:17 -0700
Message-ID: <CAA93jw4V_NtiuJJDtfVFBt-fHAWhkx7RFNFAaW=5gG3ORvV8cg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
Cc: Dave Taht <dave@taht.net>, "ecn-sane@lists.bufferbloat.net" <ecn-sane@lists.bufferbloat.net>, "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/wCOBEYKK1FKjOnIvHpHF5wxGqaM>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] [Ecn-sane] is FQ actually widely deployed?
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, 22 Jul 2019 17:09:42 -0000
On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 7:14 AM Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> wrote: > > On Fri, 19 Jul 2019, Dave Taht wrote: > > > In particular conflating "low latency" really confounds the subject > > matter, and has for years. FQ gives "low latency" for the vast > > majority of flows running below their fair share. L4S promises "low > > My observations from the business is that FQ just isn't a thing, in > reality. It's not an easily discussed "thing". As one example of many, if there is anybody out there in https://common.net/ 's service range that would like to do some benchmarking... FQ has always been part of meraki's products and ubnt's airmax. Meraki does it a bit weirdly, doing sfq at a low level and codel via click. > I run CAKE myself here on my OpenWrt box and it works great, but I have > yet to find a commercially available box used by ISPs or something that is It is certainly a sadness that more ISPs are not shipping gear that does this at this point. There are several I know of in addition to common and free.fr but can't talk about it. The biggest penetration is on QCA wifi'd devices where no configuration is required. > a big-seller in electronics stores that use FQ_anything, or is even flow > aware when it comes to forwarding. Hmm? Nearly everything derived from openwrt commercially has it. More generally, debian linux derived Google wifi, chromebooks, eero have publically disclosed their usage. I have not purchased any newer routers in years, but I recently configged a new synology router for a friend, and it had "something" that did the right things, packet captures were interleaved... > > I have heard nothing about FQ being implemented in packet accelerators. I > do hear about people wanting to turn on things that control delay/buffer > fill, but this is still single queue with no flow-aware anything. This seems true. > Do we have numbers on how much FQ is actually out there? If we don't, can > we measure it? Anyone know of devices shipping or being designed that does > FQ of some kind? see above? > -- > Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se > _______________________________________________ > Ecn-sane mailing list > Ecn-sane@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/ecn-sane -- Dave Täht CTO, TekLibre, LLC http://www.teklibre.com Tel: 1-831-205-9740
- [tsvwg] is FQ actually widely deployed? Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: [tsvwg] [Ecn-sane] is FQ actually widely depl… Jonathan Morton
- Re: [tsvwg] [Ecn-sane] is FQ actually widely depl… Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
- Re: [tsvwg] [Ecn-sane] is FQ actually widely depl… Dave Taht
- Re: [tsvwg] [Ecn-sane] is FQ actually widely depl… Pete Heist
- Re: [tsvwg] [Ecn-sane] is FQ actually widely depl… Jonathan Morton
- Re: [tsvwg] [Ecn-sane] is FQ actually widely depl… Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: [tsvwg] [Ecn-sane] is FQ actually widely depl… Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: [tsvwg] [Ecn-sane] is FQ actually widely depl… Sebastian Moeller
- Re: [tsvwg] [Ecn-sane] is FQ actually widely depl… Jonathan Morton
- Re: [tsvwg] [Ecn-sane] is FQ actually widely depl… Sebastian Moeller
- Re: [tsvwg] [Ecn-sane] is FQ actually widely depl… Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: [tsvwg] [Ecn-sane] is FQ actually widely depl… Dave Taht
- Re: [tsvwg] [Ecn-sane] is FQ actually widely depl… Jonathan Foulkes