Re: [tsvwg] New rev of draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id-17

Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com> Mon, 24 May 2021 11:08 UTC

Return-Path: <chromatix99@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 B0ED53A241B for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 May 2021 04:08:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.847
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.847 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, 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 VcX-PIEN5DlM for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 May 2021 04:08:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x22c.google.com (mail-lj1-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::22c]) (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 373D03A241A for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 May 2021 04:08:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x22c.google.com with SMTP id o8so33086884ljp.0 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 May 2021 04:08:22 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=AvHVhl+jVjAy1UG2jpECvquODUf+U/H5J8sjCeE/RrM=; b=oTG6R6ZD/5sXreIZRPeNgoKDA+MbsX885CO7HrKuj1ZnH+fvjLAAuoquqrJdmUIECm JT8K8fQp7m0TuB/gArsawDwwkYADk7N5+07Lsr2Fu9YTJCSJiek9ZaYBuVCGYR7SrEIo RW399Xf2bO8wJRfPEcOpWE6DkwOrghDGvGyAI5cOX8wuot9q73b5FZgk5lWz7UdLHlvO MiPazMDSbKM/UxvqrycDCvXY6g7mAmnXkW0G4cArQoZeGyLqY4/vzd/j6DcFApRMVw9O 6rMhGtcd1bRv9OqzUpgkPONF9pExF1TVXaCMAl35pPEb3BByCUP13RK2dCYtIpikaQMu MKhw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=AvHVhl+jVjAy1UG2jpECvquODUf+U/H5J8sjCeE/RrM=; b=UOCCRRKHOMwEkxQZ5VEMq+NODQCkcBTiqxY6KPBRwH1v4PH/AK2VCfnP6x/e30rnms L+1mA5cs1lmzdJBeLB9QUKbMjNwkwOVs0WcEVS6BkBzGW7JQBpN6PDTQpWAeUbUok6gd xyeMXNnfJkjh9EzuefB50fYTxyhDV8iEfN0b1uuelNsRQHA/4OQCkAMLOuGi9qhBjAcg czDFHzvvOSiduHcEHv2AENifwZHEAfK0WUhwoRjT3Hw09ZrHRJiWPdBCqledTFO+qhjO mGZZIuOkOKcVTAnaDjpft33yEW59fVtebu32RxqxCE3f97qWFDnlCb0A97ATFPusNNAH FnwQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5312pNVtdebrt9SQv132XYJS/wg5uaJ/3sfD9wQ9atg0tUqC7jd8 hx94MzDpEYNg5lAM/NjcZW8=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxXcw7JuBQLojD0J+lvft+SxKOuDwI8NREp+WJU7uSS9QaJ8HD0OtGLfbx7VI3tS8QstOPvEg==
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:8656:: with SMTP id i22mr16430796ljj.356.1621854500531; Mon, 24 May 2021 04:08:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from jonathartonsmbp.lan (37-136-237-77.rev.dnainternet.fi. [37.136.237.77]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s1sm1496668lfd.270.2021.05.24.04.08.19 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 24 May 2021 04:08:20 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.7\))
From: Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <443768FD-CAB3-4670-9F1A-9F311D915401@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 24 May 2021 14:08:18 +0300
Cc: Bob Briscoe <ietf@bobbriscoe.net>, tsvwg@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <0F964DC7-804A-4E75-A009-7B79D59BDF5E@gmail.com>
References: <162158815765.22731.15608328324211025925@ietfa.amsl.com> <f8ed1105-d1db-55ce-eb1f-00de8a83b0e8@bobbriscoe.net> <3F147A3D-BD68-4F0A-89FF-9A92284FF0A5@gmx.de> <c80a96a6-d6d4-3773-9048-805a76c6f926@bobbriscoe.net> <443768FD-CAB3-4670-9F1A-9F311D915401@gmx.de>
To: Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.7)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/y1F0QVVpkRq6NjzSQi8-c7536bM>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] New rev of draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id-17
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, 24 May 2021 11:08:29 -0000

> On 24 May, 2021, at 1:54 pm, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
> 
>> BTW, the C-queue target has never been 25ms. I noticed JM said that incorrectly as well recently.
> 
> 	[SM] Fair enough (it seems I ms-attributed the https://github.com/L4STeam/linux/commit/a2ef76f8da1c9d1b13fa941f55607f3e60d4112eprague_rtt_target with the typical_rtt), but that only changes the numbers slightly the issue is still he same...
> 
> 
>> * A default C queue delay target of 15ms has always been recommended in aqm-dualq-coupled.
> 
> 	[SM] Not quite "always", https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-aqm-dualq-coupled-00 stated:
> "target = 20ms"
> But from https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-aqm-dualq-coupled-01 on it has been and still is set to 15ms...
> 
> Which reminds me, I still would like to see the stability analysis and optimization work that lead to that number.

Checking the code in sch_dualpi2.c, I find that the default target delay is indeed 15ms.  However, this still results in a *median* delay of 25ms when used with CUBIC.  Not 99+%ile, but MEDIAN.  It's not my place to figure out how that happens, precisely, just to observe that it does.  So there is basically 25ms of delay *difference* between the L and C queues, and that is what I based my analysis on.

 - Jonathan Morton