Re: [Bloat] How about a topical LWN article on demonstrating the real-world goodness of CAKE?

[Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>]

> On 8 Sep, 2020, at 7:48 pm, Matt Mathis via Bloat <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
> 
> To be simplistic, you might just talk about cake vs (bloated) drop tail.  To be thorough, you also need to make the case that cake is better than other AQMs.  This feels like too much for LWN, but silence on other solutions might trigger skeptics.

Personally, my position is:

1: Bloated dumb FIFOs are terrible.

2: Basic AQM is good.  This can be as simple as TBF+WRED; it solves a large part of the basic problem by eliminating multi-second queue delays.  In some cases this can solve very serious problems, such as DNS lookups failing when the link is loaded, quite adequately.  Properly configured, you can keep queue delays below the 100ms threshold for reasonable VoIP performance.

3: FQ-AQM is better.  That generally means HTB+fq_codel, but other forms of this exist.  It means essentially zero added delay for non-saturating flows.  It's an easy way to make DNS, VoIP and online gaming work nicely without having to restrict data-hungry applications.

4: Cake offers some extra tools and aims to be easier (more intuitive) to configure.  Currently, it is the best solution for slow and medium-speed broadband (up to 100Mbps), and can also be used at higher speeds with some care, mostly regarding device performance.

 - Jonathan Morton