From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ig0-x232.google.com (mail-ig0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::232]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3D2B821F2DA for ; Wed, 22 Apr 2015 09:16:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by igbyr2 with SMTP id yr2so918279igb.0 for ; Wed, 22 Apr 2015 09:16:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to:references :content-type:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=iFLq1ITXsiHiG4VbdHl5bpw8sKUFv2+Tov3hEtSVWrU=; b=JqlQDtZkpeEosl2EGaFqcn+9yxTAY9c8bPQ9C4ja9rAtiW8ZLS2nxSUGyfuwvWVtnm 0fToCfCujKLLwQbXDxouM+nDiQ96PrVN4YZ+Yj83mOiEg/xwNf36cZu1BlE5Er0IWQQ0 STKmDOWXik7pCyJiq6BI3gmeH8H/MH/OyVOydIUwTmGVWjj3r3EDdfXvPKA1t0Z/Y7ex uhYCitPzEhmVheT9tV2hhjwxn/roOXrB1uNgWtlJLA/K3st0i9UfCvsF+FB7NsDABzo0 EwxZ69fjOvF5E5T1xcxL67q9PbkFK1dpXzGi2JeD/L9aS8il+YBUF0L8AuHP7av9FlNX PSRg== X-Received: by 10.107.135.144 with SMTP id r16mr38336957ioi.13.1429719394952; Wed, 22 Apr 2015 09:16:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.26.55.207] ([172.26.55.207]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id j2sm3410823ioi.8.2015.04.22.09.16.33 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 22 Apr 2015 09:16:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1429719393.18561.106.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com> From: Eric Dumazet To: "Steinar H. Gunderson" Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2015 09:16:33 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20150422155933.GA20218@sesse.net> References: <2C987A4B-7459-43C1-A49C-72F600776B00@gmail.com> <14cd9e74e48.27f7.e972a4f4d859b00521b2b659602cb2f9@superduper.net> <20150422040453.GB36239@sesse.net> <1429676935.18561.42.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com> <12383_1429692679_55376107_12383_9099_1_p7gmr0psut68sen0sao8o4lp.1429692550899@email.android.com> <1429710657.18561.68.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com> <25065_1429716388_5537BDA4_25065_2328_1_63pyislbvtjf653k3qt8gw2c.1429715929544@email.android.com> <20150422155933.GA20218@sesse.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.10.4-0ubuntu2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: bloat Subject: Re: [Bloat] RE : DSLReports Speed Test has latency measurement built-in 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, 22 Apr 2015 16:17:04 -0000 On Wed, 2015-04-22 at 17:59 +0200, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote: > On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 03:26:27PM +0000, luca.muscariello@orange.com wrote: > > BTW if a paced flow from Google shares a bloated buffer with a non paced > > flow from a non Google server, doesn't this turn out to be a performance > > penalty for the paced flow? > > Nope. The paced flow puts less strain on the buffer (and hooray for that), > which is a win no matter if the buffer is contended or not. > > > fq_codel gives incentives to do pacing but if it's not deployed what's the > > performance gain of using pacing? > > fq_codel doesn't give any specific incentive to do pacing. In fact, if > absolutely all devices on your path would use fq_codel and have adequate > buffers, I believe pacing would be largely a no-op. While this might be true for stationary flows (ACK driven, no pacing is enforced in sch_fq), sch_fq/pacing is still nice after idle period. Say a flow deliver chunks of data. With pacing, you no longer have to slow start after idle.