Re: [Bloat] [Ecn-sane] can we setup a "how to get this into existing networks" get-together in Prague coming week?
On Tue, 26 Mar 2019, Holland, Jake wrote: Hi Mikael, Any operator nibbles on making this meeting happen? Nobody else expressed any interest in this, so I kind of dropped the idea. -- Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se ___ Bloat mailing list Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
Re: [Bloat] [Ecn-sane] can we setup a "how to get this into existing networks" get-together in Prague coming week?
Hi Mikael, Any operator nibbles on making this meeting happen? I'm not sure how useful I can be, but if there's any network operators reading, I would love to hear the questions and concerns from your side, and I'm happy to explain anything I can help explain. (Of course if it's just going to be vendors and/or implementors getting together to agree ECN is a good idea, we might as well bring plenty of beer...) -Jake On 2019-03-23, 20:12, "Mikael Abrahamsson" wrote: On Sat, 23 Mar 2019, Jonathan Morton wrote: > Heated agreement from over here, despite my preference for flow > isolation. Plain old AQM can be orders of magnitude better than a dumb > FIFO. In my testing, FIFO with RED was already huge improvement over just plain FIFO. Configuring 1GE shaping with FIFO yielded 100ms buffering just by naive configuration, adding one line of random-detect config brought this down to 10-15ms without any loss of actual throughput. On Thu, 21 Mar 2019, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: Btw, I reached out to some people here at the BBF about doing anti-bufferbloat in this context and getting this into the documents, and there is no reason why this can't be introduced. Now, the proposal needs to be "reasonable" and implementable, so if someone would be interested in work like that I'd like to hear from you. I have taken initiative in trying to come up with configuration guidance for operators for their existing equipment, and that could be a way forward. ... I'll be at the IETF meeting monday-friday coming week, can we set up a meeting with some interested parties and actually have a "how do we get this into networks" kind of meeting. It would not be "my mechanism is better than yours" meeting, I'm not interested in that in this context. ___ Bloat mailing list Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
Re: [Bloat] [Ecn-sane] can we setup a "how to get this into existing networks" get-together in Prague coming week?
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019, Jonathan Morton wrote: Heated agreement from over here, despite my preference for flow isolation. Plain old AQM can be orders of magnitude better than a dumb FIFO. In my testing, FIFO with RED was already huge improvement over just plain FIFO. Configuring 1GE shaping with FIFO yielded 100ms buffering just by naive configuration, adding one line of random-detect config brought this down to 10-15ms without any loss of actual throughput. -- Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se ___ Bloat mailing list Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
Re: [Bloat] [Ecn-sane] can we setup a "how to get this into existing networks" get-together in Prague coming week?
> On 23 Mar, 2019, at 7:00 am, Holland, Jake wrote: > > I agree even getting some regular basic CE-marking stuff deployed > would probably be really cool if it can be done sanely. Heated agreement from over here, despite my preference for flow isolation. Plain old AQM can be orders of magnitude better than a dumb FIFO. - Jonathan Morton ___ Bloat mailing list Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
Re: [Bloat] [Ecn-sane] can we setup a "how to get this into existing networks" get-together in Prague coming week?
On 2019-03-21, 11:32, "Mikael Abrahamsson" wrote: I'll be at the IETF meeting monday-friday coming week, can we set up a meeting with some interested parties and actually have a "how do we get this into networks" kind of meeting. It would not be "my mechanism is better than yours" meeting, I'm not interested in that in this context. I'm interested in "what can we do to improve the situation in the next 1-2 years including installed base". This seems like a useful idea to me. I guess based on Apple's observations[1], we know there's at least one network in France and at least one in the Argentina that has rolled this out at some scale. Does anyone know which networks these are and maybe have contacts there? Maybe someone could find out what they did and write up a case study? I agree even getting some regular basic CE-marking stuff deployed would probably be really cool if it can be done sanely. -Jake [1] page 12: https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/98/slides/slides-98-maprg-tcp-ecn-experience-with-enabling-ecn-on-the-internet-padma-bhooma-00.pdf ___ Bloat mailing list Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
