[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20180517.154529.1714253947519146893.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 15:45:29 -0400 (EDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: ycheng@...gle.com
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, edumazet@...gle.com, ncardwell@...gle.com,
soheil@...gle.com, priyarjha@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/8] tcp: default RACK loss recovery
From: Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@...gle.com>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2018 16:40:09 -0700
> This patch set implements the features correspond to the
> draft-ietf-tcpm-rack-03 version of the RACK draft.
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/101/materials/slides-101-tcpm-update-on-tcp-rack-00
>
> 1. SACK: implement equivalent DUPACK threshold heuristic in RACK to
> replace existing RFC6675 recovery (tcp_mark_head_lost).
>
> 2. Non-SACK: simplify RFC6582 NewReno implementation
>
> 3. RTO: apply RACK's time-based approach to avoid spuriouly
> marking very recently sent packets lost.
>
> 4. with (1)(2)(3), make RACK the exclusive fast recovery mechanism to
> mark losses based on time on S/ACK. Tail loss probe and F-RTO remain
> enabled by default as complementary mechanisms to send probes in
> CA_Open and CA_Loss states. The probes would solicit S/ACKs to trigger
> RACK time-based loss detection.
>
> All Google web and internal servers have been running RACK-only mode
> (4) for a while now. a/b experiments indicate RACK/TLP on average
> reduces recovery latency by 10% compared to RFC6675. RFC6675
> is default-off now but can be enabled by disabling RACK (sysctl
> net.ipv4.tcp_recovery=0) for unseen issues.
Series applied.
These patches, the design of the ordering of changes in the patch series,
and the commit messages themselves were more than a pleasure to read.
Really, this patch series is a great model for others who want to
improve the quality and reviewability of their submissions.
Thank you.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists