Thanks Frank, So it is not the universal cure. Not surprising. I don’t see a show-stopper for pushing adoption.
Gene
----------------------------------------------
Eugene Chang
IEEE Life Senior Member
IEEE Communications Society & Signal Processing Society,
Hawaii Chapter Chair
IEEE Life Member Affinity Group Hawaii Chair
IEEE Entrepreneurship, Mentor
eugene.ch...@ieee.org
m 781-799-0233 (in Honolulu)
> On May 7, 2024, at 10:05 AM, Frantisek Borsik <frantisek.bor...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Here is a current view of it, IIRC:
>
> https://forum.openwrt.org/t/rfc9330-rfc9331-rfc9332-for-lower-latency/180519/12
>
> <https://forum.openwrt.org/t/rfc9330-rfc9331-rfc9332-for-lower-latency/180519/12>
>
> All the best,
>
> Frank
>
> Frantisek (Frank) Borsik
>
>
>
> https://www.linkedin.com/in/frantisekborsik
> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/frantisekborsik>
> Signal, Telegram, WhatsApp: +421919416714
>
> iMessage, mobile: +420775230885
>
> Skype: casioa5302ca
>
> frantisek.bor...@gmail.com <mailto:frantisek.bor...@gmail.com>
>
> On Tue, May 7, 2024 at 10:03 PM Eugene Y Chang via Starlink
> <starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net <mailto:starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net>>
> wrote:
> I thought I saw a reference to an OpenWRT implementation with L4S. How well
> does that work?
>
>
>
> Gene
> ----------------------------------------------
> Eugene Chang
>
>
>
>> On May 7, 2024, at 9:46 AM, Dave Taht <dave.t...@gmail.com
>> <mailto:dave.t...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Pete heist, jon morton, and rod grimes published a TON of research as
>> to where l4s went wrong in these github repos:
>>
>> https://github.com/heistp <https://github.com/heistp>
>>
>> The last was:
>> https://github.com/heistp/l4s-tests?tab=readme-ov-file#key-findings
>> <https://github.com/heistp/l4s-tests?tab=readme-ov-file#key-findings>
>>
>> They were ignored. Me, I had taken one look at it 7+ years ago and
>> said this cannot possibly work with the installed base of wifi
>> properly and since 97E% of all home connections terminate in that it
>> was a dead horse which they kept flogging.
>>
>> After the L4S RFCs were published they FINALLY took their brands of
>> wishful thinking to actually exploring what happeed on real wifi
>> networks, and... I have no idea where that stands today. Yes a custom
>> wifi7 AP and presumably wifi8 will be able to deal with it, but
>> everything from the backoff mechanisms in the e2e TCP Prague code and
>> the proposed implementations on routers just plain does not work
>> except in a testbed. Fq_codel outperforms it across the board with
>> perhaps, some increased sensivity to RFC3168 seems needed only. L4S
>> (all transports actually) benefits a lot from packet pacing, and...
>> wait for it... fq)
>>
>> Slow start and convergence issues are problematic also with l4s.
>>
>> Being backward incompatible with fq_codel's deployed treatment of RFC3168
>> ECN.
>> is a huge barrier too.
>>
>> The best use case I can think of for l4s is on a tightly controlled
>> docsis network, pure wires and short RTTs only. The one implementation
>> for 5G I have heard of was laughable in that they were only aiming for
>> 200ms of induced latency on that.
>>
>> If on the other hand you look at fq (and also how well starlink is
>> performing nowadays) and ccs like bbr, well...
>>
>> I do honestly think there is room for this sort of signalling
>> somewhere on the internet, and do plan to add what I think will work
>> to cake at some point in the future. I do wish SCE had won, as it was
>> backwards compatible.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, May 7, 2024 at 12:15 PM Jeremy Austin <jer...@aterlo.com
>> <mailto:jer...@aterlo.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 7, 2024 at 11:11 AM Dave Taht via Starlink
>>> <starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net <mailto:starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net>>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The RFC is very plausible but the methods break down in multiple ways,
>>>> particularly with wifi.
>>>
>>>
>>> Dave, can you elaborate more on the failures? Are these being researched or
>>> addressed in the current trials, in your opinion?
>>>
>>> Jeremy
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVFWSyMp3xg&t=1098s
>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVFWSyMp3xg&t=1098s> Waves Podcast
>> Dave Täht CSO, LibreQos
>
> _______________________________________________
> Starlink mailing list
> Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net <mailto:Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net>
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
> <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink>
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ Starlink mailing list Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
