Hi Mikael,
> On Mar 11, 2019, at 08:08, Mikael Abrahamsson <swm...@swm.pp.se> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 10 Mar 2019, Jonathan Morton wrote:
>
>> An interesting idea, but SCE marks will appear even when there's a lot of
>> congestion (at high rates, ie. probably every packet that doesn't carry CE),
>> as well as showing up at low frequency when the level of congestion only
>> warrants reducing the growth rate. I think the word "Some" is sufficiently
>> descriptive, while "Slight" might cause people to ignore it completely.
>
> One way to handle this would be "buffering experienced" or something like
> that. Ie if this packet is being enqueued into a buffer with non-trivial
> number of packets in it, mark it.
>
> The L4S proposal also has the property that their use of this last code point
> combination in the entire packet header (and this is a big thing, this is the
> last unicorn) also meant the packet was allowed to be re-ordered.
How is packet reordering for anybody but the folks responsible for
operating the "conduits" in any way attractive?
> I thought this was a big and nice thing, for other areas. This new proposal
> removes that property.
>
> From what I can see, L4S actually is quite novel and has the chance to
> seriously change the way queueing is done. This proposal seems more like "a
> little more of what we had before" which I do not think warrants claiming
> this last unicorn codepoint.
I would argue that evolutionary changes tend to look mostly like "more
of the old, just a little different" sothis might be considered a plus for this
proposal ;)
Best Regards
Sebastian
> I'd like its use to be truly novel and be more than a tweak.
>
> --
> Mikael Abrahamsson email: swm...@swm.pp.se
> _______________________________________________
> Cake mailing list
> Cake@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake
_______________________________________________
Cake mailing list
Cake@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake
