On 3/18/19, 11:35 PM, "Jonathan Morton" <chromati...@gmail.com> wrote:
From my standpoint, the major objection to L4S is that it is not
incrementally deployable, because DCTCP starves conventional TCPs unless run
through an isolated queue. This is something we quickly realised when L4S was
first announced. It is simply not practical to require all middleboxes on the
path to support L4S before L4S endpoints can safely be deployed, except in the
isolated and very controlled environments where DCTCP was "proved".
[GW] But this isn't true! L4S utilizes TCP Prague, which falls back to
traditional congestion control if the bottleneck link doesn't provide
isolation.
_______________________________________________
Bloat mailing list
Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
