From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <hmurray@megapathdsl.net>
Received: from ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net
	(ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net [64.139.1.69])
	by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABD2221F300
	for <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>; Wed, 25 Feb 2015 11:25:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from shuksan (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D738406057; 
	Wed, 25 Feb 2015 11:25:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.7.2 01/07/2005 with nmh-1.3
To: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
From: Hal Murray <hmurray@megapathdsl.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 11:25:15 -0800
Message-Id: <20150225192515.1D738406057@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net>
Cc: Hal Murray <hmurray@megapathdsl.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 <bloat.lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/options/bloat>,
	<mailto:bloat-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/bloat>
List-Post: <mailto:bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bloat-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat>,
	<mailto:bloat-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 19:25:46 -0000


> That's easy enough. You can fit an awful lot of linked list pointers into
> the space of a single IP packet. Even if you're only assigning 64KB per
> subscriber, you can store 43 full packets and still have pointers to spare.
> A properly functioning AQM should mostly keep the queue smaller than that. 

Is a slot for the head-of-list pointer all the information you need to 
remember for an empty queue?  Or do you need some memory of recent traffic?


-- 
These are my opinions.  I hate spam.