THE FOLD / CO-OP / THE MERGE / THE ECN
THE ECN
loss works when nobody has agreed on anything
1 WHAT IT IS · WHAT IT DOES · FACT OR FICTION
A congested router has two ways to say so: throw the packet away, or set a bit in it and let it through. The message is identical. What differs is whether the sender has to send the data again.
LIT verified live, both arms on the identical event sequence. 20,000 ticks at a 5% congestion rate produce 915 signals in both runs. Dropping delivers 19,085 packets and costs 91,500 ms of retransmission stall. Marking delivers all 20,000 and costs 0. 915 packets that had already crossed the network survive to be useful.
LIT verified live, both arms on the identical event sequence. 20,000 ticks at a 5% congestion rate produce 915 signals in both runs. Dropping delivers 19,085 packets and costs 91,500 ms of retransmission stall. Marking delivers all 20,000 and costs 0. 915 packets that had already crossed the network survive to be useful.
2 HOW IT WAS WEAVED · AI + HUMAN
Explicit Congestion Notification is RFC 3168, and its deployment problem is that it needs the sender, the receiver, and every hop between them to cooperate.
AVAN (AI) first ran the two arms from a single random generator, so the drop run and the mark run saw different congestion events — 915 against 1,012 — and the comparison was between two different networks. Each arm now reseeds. Same class of error as an earlier sphere that compared interleaved draws; a controlled experiment has to control the thing being held fixed.
AVAN (AI) first ran the two arms from a single random generator, so the drop run and the mark run saw different congestion events — 915 against 1,012 — and the comparison was between two different networks. Each arm now reseeds. Same class of error as an earlier sphere that compared interleaved draws; a controlled experiment has to control the thing being held fixed.
3 ONE DIMENSION
One signal, two deliveries.
4 TWO DIMENSIONS · INTERACTIVE
Change the congestion rate.
5 THREE DIMENSIONS + AVAN’S INVERSE
The green forward object: a message that survives its own warning.
AVAN’s addition (the inverse-companion): the forward reading is that marking is strictly better than dropping. The inverse is that dropping needs the agreement of nobody. A router can drop a packet with no cooperation from anything; marking requires the sender to set a bit, every hop to preserve it, and the receiver to echo it back. Read backwards, loss survived as the congestion signal not because it is good but because it is the only one that works when no one has agreed on anything — and the internet is mostly made of parties who have not.
LIT 20,000 ticks at a 5% congestion rate produce 915 signals in both arms run on the identical event sequence, where dropping delivers 19,085 packets and costs 91,500 ms of retransmission stall while marking delivers all 20,000 and costs 0 - so 915 packets that had already crossed the network survive to be useful
FIG Explicit Congestion Notification is RFC 3168, and its deployment problem is that it needs the sender, the receiver and every hop between them to cooperate. AVAN first ran the two arms from a single random generator, so the drop run and the mark run saw different congestion events - 915 against 1,012 - and the comparison was between two different networks. Each arm now reseeds; a controlled experiment has to control the thing being held fixed.
FIG Explicit Congestion Notification is RFC 3168, and its deployment problem is that it needs the sender, the receiver and every hop between them to cooperate. AVAN first ran the two arms from a single random generator, so the drop run and the mark run saw different congestion events - 915 against 1,012 - and the comparison was between two different networks. Each arm now reseeds; a controlled experiment has to control the thing being held fixed.
◆ sealed .dlw.fold → folded to ROOT_0 · a sphere of THE MERGE · David Lee Wise (ROOT0), with AVAN