From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC5BB3CB35 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2019 09:28:50 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1554211728; bh=DSuVv4FqFmppZXPyj0296IWS9umqgicl6XM7WJQT5ZA=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=ji5C85poyC0XbCTTPVsHKjtoE1VwMZgEtgSWNnT/SQgehNhCK1y4iiANBz8fwMXu4 RZAwCpnriFq9pDUaD1XBK+n+ltrEbCllxlJQyui1z5+K4jGy9D4GAf0xvFp4MaJau6 /bcqsdXgjh+KD4+1H+HTm1KG++1jg8Igws3EQceQ= X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c Received: from [172.16.12.10] ([134.76.241.253]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx001 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MC4R6-1h2TmS0mMC-008u7N; Tue, 02 Apr 2019 15:28:48 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) From: Sebastian Moeller In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2019 15:28:47 +0200 Cc: bloat , Jonathan Foulkes Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <37D30F96-0881-4D62-B536-2B3217DD3919@gmx.de> References: <47CA8CDA-3060-40C2-AC0A-04899F08C9DE@gmx.de> To: Mikael Abrahamsson X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:pnbVBZjlm3WN6TrNTWe+xvfT/ruIp1Bf5Re1CUNbWcFJOajvCBZ UhK1TZGt3YdS5haBR1bgNdJiiVkAedUdPHd7hUAUec0ceHNjCJn/LBDtnPp/Fmr0rHKMPTE h6jj1Qig+wNunsqnpt9fSshnuYHD65lQwbcRc8u0Cuikn3zeSvixEPf/HBi7qLSB8kfbFXb 6zDyBiYc8y/a9qb/UIVyQ== X-Spam-Flag: NO X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:X/8Yuc1LhPQ=:/BSxhdXpscVod1NumDcfXX +ztM++tfORLyeeZPrXP3FZuLUzPP7EU7hIyAN6xi7NlmqHHR/hsHENSoPMJ1bwdXzzNtTR3Xh 68UXsppX/jLTbpQ3qW0z1djVezDDddXsxXfHRX42CsINLyeuWrs9+aHHm6Dka8lQAW0uG1ZaE SrX8J5gi9q2VAwEayRCtshEnP/KShWIiRZHaZ0gX7mhwcjvzgkN0+65fgoNXgWNzaW5tfewYS HIqJjbi4WmgFwOH3HdJJDg0kR2CcqgH5wcbSnQKiy6KyjfUe7x6nXHCVvrp2JUYiT+EMVeTUK WxVB7wfl2NufsVE8npt910V98OtvJ9gg566ofCnop0I/kJ9i1DRhSQ9OvgDgfV/t8oAAMss4j TKXexAxS8usRx5zH4MFV7Fu1Ux6B/xph6s/zyG1DiHJbxG8/edFDdUP4CHSDfZQLJZx7nPjf4 jpoSip7WWBQzJf1I8WhSw9ZlbeEIwqOYVfn9sRJEIdnYu9FihIKiP2afxVMGX7sZld5fkSK/B Q+pu1mupVy5tCBDPWpp0jQz2ZBRbM0pfc0rgo6OjP1Ia3jKHle5Ea3GbGq//mmixEeQzAX3Fp CBDGlhreRffqdPUXMk/pbLg/EIUFJA3atv6w47sNjppuOyFMO3RZPeO98Uei6Z1NFS8t5k4a1 I0OLsNnaMQhuDgKoj86LVfDz+YJepF9KvO+6arSswY9JfUOTtZT5YzqwU3dBjLunMx13VvXg2 ePrhFi03Nhq0o9GtE2yV3IMJrY+aV0DJQXXhQ1Hoq2b6K1XW+MdjWidpMwkI+1iabcm3DK0n1 UKTC2jzxOyDX55lo2Yxb3Ht2sa4fiVxOdD4zQiRdC04Fr7My76DIYs4p3Ml5M7vKwHpB955H3 A4Ae35YRfbH5mA65JpWHoB1o5OsU3JY6a5Z8X/7p1XsCVTrAyWVYlmFuAPy7l1FrEvv4HdYol pljmXZ6S7Zw== Subject: Re: [Bloat] number of home routers with ingress AQM X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2019 13:28:51 -0000 Hi Mikael, > On Apr 2, 2019, at 15:04, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: >=20 > On Tue, 2 Apr 2019, Sebastian Moeller wrote: >=20 >> See above how Deutsche Telekom deals with that issue, at least = in the German market. >=20 > I've read rumours about some ISPs implementing interaction with the = VDSL DSLAM where there is an estimation of the current link-speed for = each individual customer and then it tries to set the BNG egress shaper = appropriately. I believe this is what Deutsche Telekom actually does already. >=20 > I am very happy about my FTTH solution I have now since from what I = can see the L2 network is almost never a limiting factor (much better = than my DOCSIS connection) so my bidirectional SQM with CAKE seems to = work very well. I envy you ;) that said, I have little issue with my VDSL2 link, = but at 50/10 it is hardly pushing the limit. DOCSIS with its often huge = segments is a mixed bag, I have head od segments with 1000 customers and = no issue even saturating a DOCSIS 3.1 1000/50 plan, and also people with = severe issues with more modes 100/20 plans. >=20 > Still, the HGW can never solve these problems properly, Assuming fixed bandwidth, it can do a pretty good approximation = of properly though ;) > the egress shaping in the BNG needs to do a proper job. I agree, but then my wishlist includes flow-queueing and then = reality intervenes, and I keep having to do this on my side as BNGs do = not offer fq for customer bandwidth shaping/policing, and might never = do. > =46rom what I have been told, there has been improvements here in the = past few years. I agree, when I started with Deutsche Telekom latency under = saturating load spikes (in ICMP probes) were above 1000ms in 2015, but = now with the Juniper BNG shaper solution I saw around 300ms (I switched = ISP, but the cap is still around 300ms). IMHO this is much better, but = also far away from good enough, so I keep shaping on my end to keep = latency acceptable (with a 50/10 link saturating loads are common enough = to justify the time spent for configuring the home ingress shaper IMHO). >=20 > What I am more worried about is the egress shaping from the HGW. If you ask me that is going to come, all shared media links = (docsis, G-PON, ...) already need this to keep customer modems from = shouting over each other. > I talked to several vendors at BBF and they talked about ingress = policing being commonly used on the BNG. This means no ingress shaping = at all (just packet drops if they exceed the configured rate). I wonder how that rhymes with the 300-1000ms added latency I see = under load, assuming the BNG-limiter to be the bottleneck. > I don't know about buffering on the HGW though and how the policed = rate is set compared to the L2 rate the HGW can send via. Typical DSL modem-routers and DOCSIS modems (presumably < 3.1) = often show pretty manly buffering (that is to say probably a bit too = much with too little brains attached ;) ). I note that the L4S-project = already identified CPEs as the next target to get upstream queueing = tackled, I see no chance for doing that effectively without getting the = ISPs on board. I have no idea how well the heavy cable labs involvement = will sit with the old telco incumbents and whether any non-ITU standard = will fly. But let's see... Best Regards Sebastian >=20 > --=20 > Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se