From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.toke.dk (mail.toke.dk [52.28.52.200]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E1D1F3B2A4 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 06:03:41 -0500 (EST) From: Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=20161023; t=1511867018; bh=mZg8gfMTcTCtfCE0YA8No9n5qS93bQf9Byi0+iDfSPQ=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=CkJxpr7sR9ZWyH0wuR5tWL3vN/Kah2FAn6cgd+PfakCw6rK4IimV2sC6Dq85ivjVb hh4P5EQbPx5M6eLETwRcM9I2K5OXA8cqY+J42egjkAT02HRv0mwkNd0LVdEUeyJAmN a93iFDlieVKV/KELElGO7C/sd7hOqa7mnEUPjgsmH8JA0YkZb5o23yL20gAbGcta3l Ku2dR85Oe8+WVkaeetPTROcu2G0Sx0HRybWfeFgBsLo+aODzezyVrxO4zEF//ALJPy NbF4Mggc1Sv6M3QQ7f5nyx3GszUgEJbgUcMz2PzvRUy0kVt7O+t/pRVHaXPCyCJW9f /rXkwQimrursw== To: Martin Geddes Cc: Dave Taht , bloat In-Reply-To: References: <87shd18c51.fsf@toke.dk> Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 12:03:36 +0100 X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Message-ID: <874lpe8y2f.fsf@toke.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Subject: Re: [Bloat] Bufferbloat in high resolution + non-stationarity 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, 28 Nov 2017 11:03:42 -0000 Martin Geddes writes: > The two critical references are this paper > and this PhD thesis > . The former describes > "cherish-urgency" multiplexing. The "cherish" is what is different to > today's scheduling. It is used to create a new class of algorithm > whose goal is global optimisation, not local optimisation (and global > pessimisation). Cool, thanks; I'll add that to my reading list (well, the paper certainly; not sure I'll get the time to go through the whole 200+ page thesis anytime soon :/) > The latter describes a paradigm change from "build it and then reason > about emergent performance" to "reason about engineered performance > and then build it". It works in practise > , > so whether it works in theory is left as an exercise to the reader. I don't suppose there's an open source implementation available to play with? -Toke