search

dwcarder / draft-cc-v6ops-wlcg-flow-label-marking

0 stars 2 forks source link

add reference to Protective Load Balance #28

Open dwcarder opened 1 year ago

dwcarder commented 1 year ago

https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3544216.3544226 https://www.phoronix.com/news/TCP-PLB-Linux https://github.com/google/bbr/blob/a23c4bb59e0c5a505fc0f5cc84c4d095a64ed361/net/ipv4/tcp_bbr2.c#L2257 https://github.com/google/bbr/blob/6e321d1c986a88e21dcbb46005668cd874de01da/net/ipv4/tcp_bbr.c#L1118C13-L1118C20

We’d need WLCG nodes to not use the feature. An “other clashing uses of flow label” inventory may be handy, this could be combined with the existing paragraph about RFC7098.

timchown commented 1 year ago

Yeah, if our draft is discussing compliance to standards (other RFCs) another section on other known uses would be useful, so we can see whether the clashes might pose an issue, and how to avoid them.

PLB is one. I’ll email Lorenzo and copy you. There may be an option to turn PLB off in BBR.