On Tue, 12 Jul 2022, Sebastian Moeller via Bloat wrote:
There are plenty of useful things that they can do and yes, I personally think
they’re the way of the future - but **not** in their current form, where they
must “lie” to TCP, cause ossification,
[SM] Here I happily agree, if we can get the nagative side-effects
removed that would be great, however is that actually feasible or just
desirable?
etc. PEPs have never been considered as part of the congestion control design -
when they came on the scene, in the IETF, they were despised for breaking the
architecture, and then all the trouble with how they need to play tricks was
discovered (spoofing IP addresses, making assumptions about header fields, and
whatnot). That doesn’t mean that a very different kind of PEP - one which is
authenticated and speaks an agreed-upon protocol - couldn’t be a good solution.
[SM] Again, I agree it could in theory especially if well-architected.
That’s what I’m advocating.
[SM] Well, can you give an example of an existing well-architected PEP
as proof of principle?
the windows protocols work very poorly over high latency links (i.e. long
distance links) and the PEPs that short circuit those protocols make life much
nicer for users as well as reducing network traffic.
it's a nasty protocol to start with, but it's the reality on the ground and
proxies do help a lot.
David Lang
_______________________________________________
Bloat mailing list
Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
