Hi Joe, On 14.04.2017 at 20:14 Joe Touch wrote: > On 3/31/2017 6:41 AM, Bless, Roland (TM) wrote: >> Lars Eggert said something like: >> "Bufferbloat is something that a congestion controller >> can't really do anything about anyway... >> it's not necessarily a congestion control problem." >> >> I believe that this statement is not correct. > FWIW, I can see both sides. > > I agree with Roland that a single endpoint *can* avoid the impact of > bufferbloat *on its individual connection*, e.g., using delay-based > feedback.
> However, having listened again to Lars's comments at the mic, I infer > that he's right too - no amount of pairwise congestion control can avoid > the aggregate effects of bufferbloat on a path. If others are creating > the bloat - individually or by aggregation - then nothing you can do > will avoid it. I tried to give a counter example that congestion control could avoid bufferbloat, however, under the assumption that _everyone_ uses the same delay-based congestion control. Since one can't exclude misbehaving flows, an AQM is a good safe guard, that also enables the use of ECN. So yes, we better use both mechanisms. Regards, Roland
