I'm the main author of eRPC, and I wanted to clarify some things.
Your comment suggests (please correct me if you meant differently) that (a) eRPC does not perform congestion control, and (b) eRPC requires a lossless fabric. In fact, eRPC implements congestion control, and it works well in a lossy network. Those are the two main contributions of the paper.
We get 75 Gbps with only UDP/Ethernet packet I/O, without RDMA support.
eRPC implements transport-layer functionality atop a fast packet I/O engine like DPDK, so comparing eRPC to DPDK isn't apples-to-apples.
Your comment suggests (please correct me if you meant differently) that (a) eRPC does not perform congestion control, and (b) eRPC requires a lossless fabric. In fact, eRPC implements congestion control, and it works well in a lossy network. Those are the two main contributions of the paper.
We get 75 Gbps with only UDP/Ethernet packet I/O, without RDMA support.
eRPC implements transport-layer functionality atop a fast packet I/O engine like DPDK, so comparing eRPC to DPDK isn't apples-to-apples.