I think most people on this aren't the ones who design the products or services, but use them. Sometimes you need to use a screwdriver as a hammer. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest-IX http://www.midwest-ix.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Saku Ytti via NANOG" <nanog@lists.nanog.org> To: "North American Network Operators Group" <nanog@lists.nanog.org> Cc: "Saku Ytti" <saku@ytti.fi> Sent: Monday, September 15, 2025 10:54:03 AM Subject: Re: Resilient Internet On Mon, 15 Sept 2025 at 18:42, Pedro Prado via NANOG <nanog@lists.nanog.org> wrote:
Btw, I’ve heard of duplication even over the _same link_ because it was detected to be lossy, just to increase the odds one of the duplicates would make it.
Sure if you misbehave you can win congested internet battles, provided most others do not misbehave. But it's likely not a reasonable place to start your product design from. That is, let's assume the original QUIC which does some sort of dynamic FEC to increase redundancy to combat loss. This is fine if loss is due to an unreliable link or such. But if, as the common case is, loss is due to congestion, then it'll only make things worse when everyone else uses the same strategy, since as packet loss increases demand for capacity increases with it as form of increased redundancy. -- ++ytti _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog@lists.nanog.org/message/2CIJMCQB...