From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.15]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mout.gmx.net", Issuer "TeleSec ServerPass DE-1" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 732FA21F263 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2015 08:55:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from hms-beagle-2.home.lan ([217.247.193.241]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx001) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LnxxQ-1XtVGl2HtI-00fzMC; Wed, 25 Feb 2015 17:54:51 +0100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) From: Sebastian Moeller In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 17:54:49 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <012AA248-69C5-4805-8CA7-1961AE04D7AE@gmx.de> References: <201502250806.t1P86o5N011632@bagheera.jungle.bt.co.uk> <4A80D1F9-F4A1-4D14-AC75-958C5A2E8168@gmx.de> <3F47B274-B0E4-44F2-A434-E3C9F7D5D041@ifi.uio.no> <87twyaffv3.fsf@toke.dk> <1D438EDC-358D-4DD5-9B8D-89182256F66C@gmx.de> To: Mikael Abrahamsson X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:+tjJImTR8Htm6XZuXjQ2Wq3pq22JRxezSlw+QUO5M/z2yXWUNBY faz+9Swx4bi6TaUMrkYcwHgcADyjVU3Brr+XU0o2/wmt2IxD1fC2YTQR2kUN4izL3ilkGrL cbnfzptn3hkQfZiBDz9jkyjqZaxL1qQnExU1Yrhw4ZtlRW8SvUvqsZbBQdUCYd4yKY2ipBr 3fqbUbyQm33CGLndS+vYQ== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1; Cc: "bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net" Subject: Re: [Bloat] RED against bufferbloat X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 16:55:31 -0000 Hi Mikael, On Feb 25, 2015, at 14:36 , Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > On Wed, 25 Feb 2015, Sebastian Moeller wrote: >=20 >> The only argument for ingress shaping on the CPE is that this = allows the end user to define her own QOS criteria independent of the = ISPs wishes. Best of both worlds would be user configurable QOS-shaping = on the slam/bras/whatever=85 >=20 > As I said before, doing FQ_CODEL in the AR is an expensive proposition = for medium and high speed access. Well a vectoring DSLAM is not too wimpy and needs to do plenty = of processing per line, so fq_codel on there should be more finically = sane than on a device with more concurrent users, I would guess... > So if this could successfully be pushed to the CPE it would mean it = would be more widely deployed. But there we face the same problem, the wimpy CPEs that ISPs = like to distribute do not have enough pomp for shaping a reasonably fast = lane, the saving grace might be that end customers can upgrade on their = own cost. And I notice a number of specialized home routers appearing on = the market targeting people wiling to spend $$ for better behavior under = load. >=20 > I am very much aware that this is being done (I have done it myself), = but my question was if someone had actually done this in a lab and found = out how well it works in RRUL tests etc. Not in the lab, no; I have no lab, but I used RRUL iteratively = to figure out empirically what shaping percentage I need on my line to = keep latency under load in bounds I consider reasonable. In my case DTAG = vdsl50 this turned out to be 90% of downlink sync and 95% of uplink sync = (but I since learned that DTAG has a BRAS policer that has a lower rate = than the VDSL-line, so I guess I was closer to 95% and 99% percent of = the BRAS policer, but heaven knows which encapsulation the BRAS accounts = for=85) So I would guess the collection of cerowrt users should be able = to cough up a number of empirical shaping percentages for different link = speeds and technologies. Here is my data, the empirically derived shaping values puzzled me until = I learned about the BRAS policer. I had expected that the uplink shaper = could run almost at 100%, which turned out to be correct if referenced = to the BRAS policer and not the vdlx sync. Anyway here is my data, maybe = others want to add their=92s: Tech downlink_kbps = uplink_kbps = CPE_shaper sync ISP_policed = CPE_shaped sync ISP_policed CPE_shaped = overhead_B linklayer VDSL2.vectoring 51390 45559 46178 10047 = 9460 9500 16 ethernet Best Regards Sebastian >=20 > --=20 > Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se