News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on We need internet that isn't owned by big telecom. Parent comment

Re:We need internet that isn't owned by big telecom by betterunix2 on Sunday December 17, 2017 @07:20PM (#15948488)
It's not just web apps; TCP itself behaves badly under high-latency conditions. If you have no other choice but to use high-latency links, you are better off with a protocol like QUIC that includes forward error correction. If you need to send a lot of data over a high-latency link you need to start looking at less common approaches; for example, this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fountain_code

When the link is unreliable -- as it is in most wireless systems -- TCP also tends to behave suboptimally as it assumes lost packets are due to congestion. Again, if you need to deal with unreliable links, forward error correction is your friend.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:We need internet that isn't owned by big telecom by stephen_g on Sunday December 17, 2017 @08:44PM (#15948803)
Have a look at Google's BBR congestion control algorithm [1]. This is perhaps a solved problem now (although it's still not supported on all platforms, but only the side sending the bulk of the data needs to have it).

1. http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=3022184

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:We need internet that isn't owned by big telecom by justicezyx on Sunday December 17, 2017 @10:12PM (#15949123)
Bbr is about high bandwidth latency product network with low error rate.

Any window based retransmission protocol just breaks under high error rate, that what happens in wireless links.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:We need internet that isn't owned by big telecom by stephen_g on Monday December 18, 2017 @12:11AM (#15949596)
No, BBR does deliver significant performance improvements in high packet loss links. It is designed as a general purpose algorithm (not just for high bandwidth links) - they are using it on the YouTube (and other) content servers as well as between their datacenters. I believe trying to optimise delivery of content to high loss, high latency mobile users was one of the use cases they designed for.

See slide 33 here for a comparison to CUBIC under packet loss - https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/98/slides/slides-98-iccrg-a...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:We need internet that isn't owned by big telecom by justicezyx on Monday December 18, 2017 @12:55AM (#15949726)
I stand corrected.
[ Parent | on HN ]