> - Is TCP using packet delay considered as part of the solution for > bufferbloat?
Not on this list, apparently. However, there has been a fair amount of research on that approach in the late noughts. I'd suggest you search for papers on TCP Vegas, TCP-LP and LEDBAT. In particular, LEDBAT is very widely deployed as part of uTP. (Your students are probably using it right now for making a backup of their DVD collection.) > - What are the problems of TCP delay variants that keep it from > solving bufferbloat? The main issue is the so-called late joiner advantage: these algorithms tend to give an unfair advantage to flows that only joined when the network was already congested, as compared to older flows. I don't know if the issue has been solved yet, it's been some time since I last looked at that stuff. > - What are the drawbacks of the TCP delay variants that would favor > AQM over TCP? > - What are the advantages of TCP delay varaints that would favor TCP > over AQM? Please be aware that they are not competitors: the two can coexist in the same network. I would say that there is consensus that AQM is necessary, and that delay-based congestion control is a nice thing to have for low-priority traffic (e.g. uTP). In other words, you cannot do without AQM, but that certainly doesn't mean there aren't people interested in deploying low-delay congestion control. -- Juliusz _______________________________________________ Bloat mailing list [email protected] https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
