Luca Muscariello <luca.muscarie...@gmail.com> writes: > To me there is substantial difference from something like fq_codel or > fq_pie where service differentiation is largely implicit > and approches largely based on explicit marking. > > Approaches based on marking face technical and non technical challenges > that have been largely mentioned in these lists. > > Fq_codel has a ton of litterature behind both theoretical and experimental > and it is something very close to optimality, in terms of completion time > and latency. > > Fq_codel also incentivizes the development of better congestion control as > the reward is immediate. It also makes Internet performance > predictable. > > Once we know that, the logical approach would be to try to approximate that > thing when the full mechanism is not possible because of a variety of > limitations. > > This is the case in some DC switches that implement AFD+priority fair > queueing at 40Gbps. > > Fq_codel has an outstanding footprint in terms of deployment. > Iliad deployed SFQ in 2005 nation wide and Fq_codel as soon as it was > available in France and is the second largest ISP. > Iliad/Free controls the development of both the home GW and the DSLAM. > They have recently started to commercialize 10Gbps to the home using > switched Ethernet. > I’m very tempted to test it. > > Kudos to them for being able to prove it is possible as long as you control > the development of your equipment. > > A logical next step to me seems to push chipcos to build fq_codel in > silicon. > It is totally feasible. > > If on the other hand we say that we can achieve all fq_codel provides with > current chipsets we’ll never create the incentives to make progress.
+100! -Toke _______________________________________________ Bloat mailing list Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
