On 5/22/24, 09:11, "Sebastian Moeller" <moell...@gmx.de <mailto:moell...@gmx.de>> wrote: >[SM] The solution is IMHO not to try to enforce rfc7282
[JL] ISTM that the things in 7282 are well reflected in how TSVWG operates. I know from experience it can be hard when rough consensus doesn't go your way - it happens. And at the end of the day there are always competing technical solutions - and if L4S indeed does not scale up well and demonstrate sufficient benefit (or demonstrate downside) then something else will win the day. _______________________________________________ Bloat mailing list Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
