...
CoDel (May 2012) has been proposed as an promising practical alternative to RED. PIE was then proposed as an alternative to CoDel, claiming to be easier to implement efficiently, in particular on "hardware" implementations.
AQM in the IETF
RFC 2309 (now obsoleted by RFC 7567, see below), Recommendations on Queue Management and Congestion Avoidance in the Internet, (1998) recommended "testing, standardization, and widespread deployment" of AQM, and specifically RED, on the Internet. The testing part was certainly followed, in the sense that a huge number of academic papers was published about RED, its perceived shortcomings, proposed alternative AQMs, and so on. There was no standardization, and very little actual deployment. While RED is implemented in most routers today, it is generally not enabled by default, and very few operators explicitly enable it. There are many reasons for this, but an important one is that optimal configuration parameters for RED depend on traffic load and tradeoffs between various optimization goals (e.g. throughput and delay). RFC 3819, Advice for Internet Subnetwork Designers, also discusses questions of AQM, in particular RED and its configuration parameters.
In March 2013, a new AQM mailing list (archive) was announced to discuss a possible replacement for RFC 2309. This evolved into the AQM Working Group. Fred Baker issued draft-baker-aqm-recommendation as a starting point. This became a Working Group document (draft-ietf-aqm-recommendation) and was submitted to the IESG in February 2015 with Gorry Fairhurst as a co-editor.
References
, which produced RFC 7567, published in July 2015 as a replacement of RFC 2309. RFC 7567 notably drops the specific recommendation of RED as an AQM mechanism.
References
- RFC 7567, IETF Recommendations Regarding Active Queue Management, F. Baker, Ed., G. Fairhurst, Ed., July 2015
- RFC RFC 2309, Recommendations on Queue Management and Congestion Avoidance in the Internet, B. Braden, D. Clark, J. Crowcroft, B. Davie, S. Deering, D. Estrin, S. Floyd, V. Jacobson, G. Minshall, C. Partridge, L. Peterson, K. Ramakrishnan, S. Shenker, J. Wroclawski, L. Zhang. April 1998 (obsoleted by RFC 7567)
- RFC 3819, Advice for Internet Subnetwork Designers, P. Karn, Ed., C. Bormann, G. Fairhurst, D. Grossman, R. Ludwig, J. Mahdavi, G. Montenegro, J. Touch, L. Wood. July 2004
- RFC 7567, IETF Recommendations Regarding Active Queue Management, F. Baker, Ed., G. Fairhurst, Ed., July 2015RFC 7806, On Queuing, Marking, and Dropping, F. Baker, R. Pan, April 2016
- Advice on network buffering, G. Fairhurst, B. Briscoe, slides presented to ICCRG at IETF-86, March 2013
- RFC 7928, Characterization Guidelines for Active Queue Management (AQM), N. Kuhn, Ed., P. Natarajan, Ed., N. Khademi, Ed., D. Ros, July 2016
- draft-lauten-aqm-gsp-03, Global Synchronization Protection for Packet Queues, Wolfram Lautenschlaeger, May 2016
- draft-ietf-tsvwg-l4s-arch-02, Low Latency, Low Loss, Scalable Throughput (L4S) Internet Service: Architecture, Bob Briscoe, Koen De Schepper, Marcelo Bagnulo, March 2018
- draft-briscoeietf-tsvwg-aqm-dualq-coupled-0518, DualQ Coupled AQM AQMs for Low Latency, Low Loss and Scalable Throughput (L4S), Koen De Schepper, Bob Briscoe, Olga Bondarenko, Ing-jyh Tsang, March 2018Greg White, October 2021
– SimonLeinen - 2005-01-05 - 20182021-0710-0426