[133608] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: TCP congestion control and large router buffers
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mikael Abrahamsson)
Tue Dec 14 08:00:29 2010
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2010 14:00:20 +0100 (CET)
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: Sam Stickland <sam@spacething.org>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=ww5LRRT+QqKPHSdBALs4FOqtHiXsNB3c7MsXh@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Tue, 14 Dec 2010, Sam Stickland wrote:
> But there's no need for AQM, just smaller buffers would make a huge
> difference.
Well, yes, buffering packets more than let's say 30-50ms on a 1 meg link
doesn't make much sense. But doing some basic AQM would make things even
better (some packets would see 0 buffering instead of 30ms).
> Surely buffers that can store seconds worth of data are simply too big?
FIFO with seconds worth of data is just silly, yes.
--
Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se
