Hi, two things (not sure whether tsv-area or tsvwg is appropriate) following today's AQM discussion in the tsvarea meeting:
- IMHO AQM work is strongly related to the transport area as transport protocols are affected (as Lars already mentioned) and we also have ECN which is not working without AQM underneath. - it may be the case that it makes no difference which AQM algorithms (codel, PIE, whatever) are actually deployed (as Matt Mathis pointed out) - and I agree with Fred that it would be good to have the flexibility to use different AQMs. However, to me it's not quite obvious how consistent a system with different heterogeneous deployed AQMs works. For instance, codel is (somewhat) tuned to TCP's CC behavior by employing a sqrt() related drop intensity, while other's are maybe not tuned to specific transport protocols. It may be interesting to study how a combination of different AQMs along a path influences the transport protocol's behavior in comparison to a more homogeneous AQM setting (maybe it doesn't matter so much as long as the bottleneck location isn't moving)... Regards, Roland
