[e2e] Congestion control as a hot topic in IETF
Jon.Crowcroft at cl.cam.ac.uk
Mon Mar 4 22:39:23 PST 2013
I doubt anyone shipping any OS with a TCP (or any other significant
transport) in is about to turn off congestion control -
the folks that do tcp in linux/android, OSX/IOS, BSD, Windows etc
are probably a bit beyond ietf unicycles or naive market and
commons arguments these days -
the details of engineering a protocol to work across
10Gbps multicore systems in data centers and on 2.5/3/4G
cellular are important and complex enough that we've become
[if you want to see where the hot topics are,
the usual top conferences have a slew of
papers n the last 2-3 years on
even cleverer tcp hacks to solve
incast and tight delay bounds
requirements, as well as some ok work
on bufferbloat (whether it happens
much or not, and various ways to fix it )
that said, anyone wanting
to witness congestion collapse should please
only try the experiment in their own back yard
and not release "working code" in the wild in a hurry,
as they'll find the consensus will be very rough
back in the day,
(why even more than 10 years after the dreaded
congestion collapse and
its repair by congestion control but still in
the last millenium)
I remember ISPs disconnecting users who
ran tcp-unfriendly flows...
that was the micro-ecnomic version
of the rationale for disconnecting
users who run p2p and mess with the
ISPs traffic engineering and
you wouldn't get in an airplane today
that did not have feedback controllers
stabilising its flight autonomically -
why would you drive on the interweb
without such technological safety measures?
maybe no-one ever made money from this stuff,
but an awful lot of people would
lose their shirts if we stopped
In missive <51351F2E.9050808 at dcrocker.net>, Dave Crocker typed:
>>On 3/4/2013 9:45 AM, Bob Braden wrote:
>>> It seems like an interesting question for research to determine
>>> whether widespread adoption of some future transport protocol with an
>>> ill-advised or inadequate CC mechanism could still cause congestion
>>> collapse of large areas of the Internet,or only local patches.
>>That seems a particularly counter-productive strawman to pursue.
>>There is no community dismissal of the need for good CC mechanisms.
>>There is no reduction in community review of proposals. There is no
>>leverage to force the community to deploy bad CC mechanisms.
>>Stray comments from stray individuals do not create a problem. Unless
>>we let them distract us.
>>So please don't start believing that we have any more danger of
>>deploying bad mechanisms now than we've had for the last 40 years.
>> Dave Crocker
>> Brandenburg InternetWorking
More information about the end2end-interest