Hello, I would be grateful for the list's feedback re: our new paper that attempts to show that there is no universal AQM or scheduling scheme, and proposes extending SDN to the data plane to allow a switch to implement different scheduling and queue management algorithms, even after being installed. The paper, along with instructions to reproduce its results, is available here: http://web.mit.edu/anirudh/www/sdn-data-plane.html
We compared three queue-management schemes on a bottleneck gateway in simulation: CoDel running on a single queue (as described in "man tc-codel"), CoDel with per-flow queues (fq_codel, as described in "man tc-fq_codel"), and per-flow queueing with long DropTail queues. It turns out that depending on the objectives desired by the traffic running across the gateway, any one of these schemes can be better than any other -- i.e. A>B>C>A and A>C>B>A. In other words, we don't think there is likely to be a 'best' AQM scheme Our proposal to address the absence of a universal in-network configuration is a switch data plane that's flexible enough to implement new scheduling and queue management schemes. To be clear, this work is merely a position paper at this point, and needs a lot more thought before such a design is feasible at line rates on switches with an aggregate capacity reaching 1 Terabit/sec. We are presenting this next month at HotNets, so we are grateful for any feedback from the list. Anirudh _______________________________________________ Codel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/codel
