On Fri, 9 Oct 2015, Greg White wrote:
On 10/9/15, 2:04 PM, "Mark Allman" <[email protected]> wrote:
1) *you* shouldn't be using a mechanism that destroys information for
others
2) *you* don't know where your mechanism will have an impact
3) you claim this might be safe *if* AQM is widely deployed
tl;dr summary: myopia is why we can't have nice things
Too true. DOCSIS would have been much cleaner if we didn't have to deal
with the fallout from the myopic TCP designers. :-P
So I agree that most likely, it's beneficial to have fewer ACKs.
What I think people arguing against this practice are these kinds of
issues:
http://blog.dan.drown.org/sb6183-dropping-ipv6-traffic/
I don't think there is a solution that we all can agree on, all approaches
have their benefits and drawbacks. I think the above article just shows
how things can go wrong in very subtle ways.
--
Mikael Abrahamsson email: [email protected]
_______________________________________________
aqm mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm
