Two things: 1) Do they understand Fair Queuing among flows? I actually doubt it or they would have commented on it, to be intellectually honest. But maybe they will publish another paper that includes that? I get really frustrated when reviewers don't force papers to address well-known contradictory evidence. What are reviewers and referees who are expert in the field for if not that? (my crankiness is justified, I believe, by my commitment to research quality. But hey, maybe MIT CSAIL faculty and SIGCOMM don't care about quality? Or maybe there's been nothing published about FQ? 2) I absolutely hate folks who invent "theorems" that say you can have "any two of three" properties. It's become popular in computer systems research, but it actually creates a huge intellectual mess. The CAP theorem, for example has some very peculiar definitions in order to make C, A, and P "independent" axes. Of course they are NOT independent in engineering practice. In fact, they aren't even "binary" - there's no "yes" or "no" to C, A or P - they are not even spectra that map to some increasing sequence. Yes, you can't always get what you want. But you can almost always get what you need, and that is never a specific two out of three. Especially not in queue management algorithms. Goddamn cutesy anti-intellectuals.
_______________________________________________ Starlink mailing list [email protected] https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
