Some tests were done on Comcast networks on cable plant.
Slide deck below explains it:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/118/materials/slides-11...
Not sure where this leads but I guess ISPs will start charging toll for express lanes
Slide deck below explains it:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/118/materials/slides-11...
Not sure where this leads but I guess ISPs will start charging toll for express lanes
Also, when the congestion signal disappears you can try to push the transfer speed up immediately, rather than slowly ramping back up like with TCP.
L4S actually includes an extra bit of information in IP packets that routers can mutate to explicitly say when they are congested.
This means that you (a) don't need to play exponential backoff games, (b), don't need to re-send redundant packets, and (c) don't need big buffers in routers.
You need big buffers in routers because otherwise exponential backoff goes crazy. But when you add big buffers, you get latency, which is another kind of suck.
In order to avoid latency, you need to avoid buffers, which is hard unless you avoid exponential backoff. To avoid exponential backoff, you need routers to actually communicate their congestion, by sending more information. L4S does that by using an unallocated bit in IP packets.
Which feels much easier and much less heavy-handed than what you can to today. Which technically is a great thing but just wondering about misuse aspect.
Doubtful IMO. I think latency becomes another competitive differentiator, much like throughput/speed is today. (this is a personal comment but I work at Comcast)