nanog mailing list archives
Re: buffer bloat and packet pacing
From: Saku Ytti <saku () ytti fi>
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2015 15:19:47 +0300
On 3 September 2015 at 15:04, Nick Hilliard <nick () foobar org> wrote:
optimally, but tcp slow start will generally stop this from happening on well behaved sending-side stacks so you send up ramping up quickly to path rate rather than egress line rate from the sender side.
This assumes network is congested and unable to reach its potential rate. If it can reach its potential rate, eventually the window will scale to 375MB and the pathological flooding will occur. Mostly network is congested, and the pathological case cannot happen, as the egress cannot ingest the floods, not allowing window to grow to needed size, which also means the potential rate will not be reached, and rate will be something less than 10Gbps. Essentially we threw the baby out with the bath water, kind of like protecting from DoS by killing the victim. -- ++ytti
Current thread:
- buffer bloat and packet pacing Saku Ytti (Sep 03)
- Re: buffer bloat and packet pacing Saku Ytti (Sep 03)
- Re: buffer bloat and packet pacing Nick Hilliard (Sep 03)
- Re: buffer bloat and packet pacing Saku Ytti (Sep 03)
- Re: buffer bloat and packet pacing Brett Frankenberger (Sep 03)
- Re: buffer bloat and packet pacing Saku Ytti (Sep 03)
- Re: buffer bloat and packet pacing Brett Frankenberger (Sep 03)
- Software Defined Networking Rod Beck (Sep 04)
- Re: Software Defined Networking Jethro R Binks (Sep 04)
- Re: Software Defined Networking Niraj Kacha (Sep 04)
- Re: Software Defined Networking Narseo Vallina Rodriguez (Sep 05)
- Re: Software Defined Networking John Kristoff (Sep 04)
- Message not available
- Re: Software Defined Networking Ignacio de castro (Sep 05)
- Re: Software Defined Networking Jennifer Rexford (Sep 05)