From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pd0-f169.google.com (mail-pd0-f169.google.com [209.85.192.169]) (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 0D2A621F1FE for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2013 19:46:59 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pd0-f169.google.com with SMTP id v10so4033507pde.28 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2013 19:46:59 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=3ZtTcQUhgJADJWfr81tyTwmoP01Ja9pR5P5K4TT+CTo=; b=htYiS67kTMF3A85XbbXi5krhH/taohiakHfnYkk5aRpnCoY8onDkA8xygDvYLk9PFu 9ksIoh0JXJeHQHHhlZJH1Ek/n2Tm/781V+Lpbusr3Q16A3QDOaocf706Z6TztsXZyMVv sPm5e7dXie127KygB5l/J1x9dPEc9x7otBCF0yaGtP37wNRu8ngZZXDWO93qcVZ6jc2M whxIOkxeeIdS9AhVGdMJsHFJ9Jgum7PDxs2qv95Asvn3XhvRaxqag0MSN7/mVgb6Ak7m w2R/ualCnV9UMPoH6wkwYuW26WEjp3yjzojlmfE8YXYGMWfk0ettcy1MJTUzQRbAbZYy zjig== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnq46f5w92gwBdpe6lnyULRyOyhVI5ExWbB2uTm+DjprComJCyyKXC7scwFLgO31MGm0qXn X-Received: by 10.66.175.4 with SMTP id bw4mr6530238pac.56.1387684019283; Sat, 21 Dec 2013 19:46:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net (static-50-53-83-51.bvtn.or.frontiernet.net. [50.53.83.51]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id bz4sm24594726pbb.12.2013.12.21.19.46.58 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 21 Dec 2013 19:46:59 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2013 19:46:55 -0800 From: Stephen Hemminger To: Dan Siemon Message-ID: <20131221194655.796fa656@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net> In-Reply-To: <1387676321.2098.4.camel@ganymede.home> References: <20131203222559.GV8066@einstein.kenyonralph.com> <7ieh5pew2d.wl%jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr> <87haakx1ev.wl%jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr> <09D8F3A0-7172-4677-9887-119813E28740@gmx.de> <877gbfcw4t.wl%jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr> <87vbyzb5fl.wl%jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr> <15B33C3B-4F1D-4CC6-AC24-CA8926047D38@gmx.de> <1387676321.2098.4.camel@ganymede.home> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.1 (GTK+ 2.24.10; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Juliusz Chroboczek , bloat Subject: Re: [Bloat] curious..... 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: Sun, 22 Dec 2013 03:47:00 -0000 On Sat, 21 Dec 2013 20:38:41 -0500 Dan Siemon wrote: > On Sun, 2013-12-08 at 20:02 +0100, Sebastian Moeller wrote: > > About prioritizing, I am less optimistic as I can not see how the system can behave well under extreme load; I for one would be quite unhappy if an device on my internal network could effectively DOS my ability to make phone calls (I switched to IP telephony so this theoretical issue has become practical for me). > > Or put it that way, I hope that the core internet is over-provided and will not cause congestion, at the same time I want to be able to max out my internet connection and still be able to phone. > > Making it impossible for an internal host to DOS VoIP quality is one of > the reasons I've been playing with per host fairness in addition to > three priority levels (per host). The tc script is below with a link to > performance results. > > http://git.coverfire.com/?p=linux-qos-scripts.git;a=blob;f=src-3tos.sh;hb=HEAD > > _______________________________________________ > Bloat mailing list > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat Looks like wonder shaper. It is a fine idea if you know the number of hosts and flows and traffic and upstream bandwidth. But if you don't then it gets to be a mess.