Well, of all the devices in my house (maybe 100), only the router attached to the cable modem (which is a 2x GigE Intel Linux board based on Fedora 29 server with sch_cake configured) is running fq_codel. And setting that up was a labor of love. But it works a charm for my asymmetric Gigabit cable service. My home's backbone is 10 GigE fiber, so I suppose fq_codel would be helpful for devices that run on 1 GigE subnets like my 2 802.11ac access points when talking to my NAS's. However, the 802.11ac access point high speed functionality doesn't seem to be supportable by LEDE. So what can I do? I suppose I could stick some little custom Intel Linux 2x GigE devices between access points and the 10 GigE backbone, and put fq_codel in there. My point is, to get the primary benefit of bufferbloat reduction, one has to stick little Linux boxes everywhere, because fq_codel is not supported except via DIY hacking. And indeed, 10 GigE->1 GigE buffering does affect storage access latency in bad ways. We see the same problem in datacenter networks that have excessive buffering - a famous switch company backed by Andy Bechtolsheim is really problematic because they claim building up huge buffers is a "feature" not a bug. -----Original Message----- From: "Valdis Klētnieks" Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2019 1:57pm To: "Rich Brown" Cc: "cerowrt-devel" , "bloat" Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] fq_codel is SEVEN years old today... _______________________________________________ Cerowrt-devel mailing list Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel On Tue, 14 May 2019 08:16:06 -0400, Rich Brown said: > Let's all pat ourselves on the back for this good work! Do we have an estimate of what percent of connected devices are actually using fq_codel or other modern anti-bloat methods? I'm reasonably sure my TV, my PS3, and my PS4 are still behind the curve.