From: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@linux-foundation.org>
To: <shaoliu@Princeton.EDU>
Cc: "'Lachlan Andrew'" <lachlan.andrew@gmail.com>,
"'David S. Miller'" <davem@davemloft.net>,
"'Herbert Xu'" <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
"'Douglas Leith'" <doug.leith@nuim.ie>,
"'Robert Shorten'" <robert.shorten@nuim.ie>,
<netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] TCP illinois max rtt aging
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2007 16:32:17 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071203163217.27e4df3f@freepuppy.rosehill> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <002f01c83608$8a2fb600$9e8f2200$@edu>
On Mon, 3 Dec 2007 15:59:23 -0800
"Shao Liu" <shaoliu@Princeton.EDU> wrote:
> Hi Stephen and Lachlan,
>
> Thanks for the discussion. The gradual aging is surely an option. And
> another possibility is that, we compute the RTT just before congestion
> notification, which ideally, represent the full queueing delay + propagation
> delay. We can compute the average of the last M such values, and either use
> the average as maxRTT, or use it as a benchmark to judge whether a sample is
> outlier. How do you think of this idea?
The problem with an average like that would be storing enough values
to be useful and choosing how many to store. Perhaps some form of
weighted sliding average which favors recent values heavily would work
best. Remember that RTT's have a huge noise component and you are
fighting against the long tail distribution trying to see the queue
effects.
>
> And also a question, why the samples when SACK is active are outliers?
Any sample with SACK is going to mean a loss or reordering has occurred.
So shouldn't the SACK values be useful, but RTT values from retransmits
are not useful.
>
> For the accuracy of time stamping, I am not very familiar with the
> implementation details. But I can think of two ways, 1) do time stamp in as
> low layer as possible; 2) use as high priority thread to do it as possible.
> For 2), we can use separate threads to do time stamp and to process packets.
Right now the resolution is in microseconds using the hardware clock.
The clock usage costs a little bit, but makes the math more accurate.
It would be worth exploring sensitivity by taking out RTT_STAMP from
the flags field and varying HZ.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-12-04 0:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <aa7d2c6d0711261023m3d2dd850o76a8f44aef022f39@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <001001c83063$9adbc9d0$d5897e82@csp.uiuc.edu>
2007-11-28 23:47 ` [PATCH] tcp-illinois: incorrect beta usage Stephen Hemminger
2007-11-29 0:25 ` Lachlan Andrew
2007-11-29 0:43 ` Stephen Hemminger
2007-11-29 5:26 ` Shao Liu
2007-12-03 22:52 ` [RFC] TCP illinois max rtt aging Stephen Hemminger
2007-12-03 23:06 ` Lachlan Andrew
2007-12-03 23:59 ` Shao Liu
2007-12-04 0:32 ` Stephen Hemminger [this message]
2007-12-04 1:23 ` Lachlan Andrew
2007-12-04 8:37 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2007-12-07 3:27 ` Lachlan Andrew
2007-12-07 11:05 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2007-12-07 12:41 ` David Miller
2007-12-07 13:05 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2007-12-07 18:27 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2007-12-08 1:32 ` David Miller
2007-12-11 11:59 ` [RFC PATCH net-2.6.25 uncompilable] [TCP]: Avoid breaking GSOed skbs when SACKed one-by-one (Was: Re: [RFC] TCP illinois max rtt aging) Ilpo Järvinen
2007-12-11 12:32 ` [RFC PATCH net-2.6.25 uncompilable] [TCP]: Avoid breaking GSOed skbs when SACKed one-by-one David Miller
2007-12-12 0:14 ` Lachlan Andrew
2007-12-12 15:11 ` David Miller
2007-12-12 23:35 ` Lachlan Andrew
2007-12-12 23:38 ` David Miller
2007-12-13 0:00 ` Stephen Hemminger
2007-12-15 9:51 ` SACK scoreboard (Was: Re: [RFC PATCH net-2.6.25 uncompilable] [TCP]: Avoid breaking GSOed skbs when SACKed one-by-one) Ilpo Järvinen
2008-01-08 7:36 ` SACK scoreboard David Miller
2008-01-08 12:12 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2008-01-09 7:58 ` David Miller
2008-01-08 16:51 ` John Heffner
2008-01-08 22:44 ` David Miller
2008-01-09 1:34 ` Lachlan Andrew
2008-01-09 6:35 ` David Miller
2008-01-09 2:25 ` Andi Kleen
2008-01-09 4:27 ` John Heffner
2008-01-09 6:41 ` David Miller
2008-01-09 14:56 ` John Heffner
2008-01-09 18:14 ` SANGTAE HA
2008-01-09 18:23 ` John Heffner
2008-01-09 12:55 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2008-01-09 6:39 ` David Miller
2008-01-09 7:03 ` Andi Kleen
2008-01-09 7:16 ` David Miller
2008-01-09 9:47 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2008-01-09 14:02 ` Andi Kleen
2007-11-29 14:12 ` [PATCH] tcp-illinois: incorrect beta usage Herbert Xu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20071203163217.27e4df3f@freepuppy.rosehill \
--to=shemminger@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=doug.leith@nuim.ie \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=lachlan.andrew@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=robert.shorten@nuim.ie \
--cc=shaoliu@Princeton.EDU \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox