From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.toke.dk (mail.toke.dk [45.145.95.4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D7DC43B2A4 for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2020 07:59:13 -0400 (EDT) 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=1601553550; bh=IGIBbaM9vjbeJvF6lOERhv0Qa5sPoOaBBaDhD4bMxbU=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=n2Z3+SkbgQ3/EXtXJSggTOeB5Rq9xv1FLNNV+p7DNzQpzSsU8ff9J7APbktenECV1 /rN6kBZDB+TKbFcTuT5sZmkw5ykrFhzoloI0xn6JC/CCh6IpOz5E8T7W3SAyyDA7xc 8B+quErijFL4V2ZAOc0Km4j/eT9UmrVuALTrC1nyu2InrneiAZnr48Ha1roCNACXBP Jth5znmGIESdhukuls6FQFcHifXFQnOcquW0Ta5UYPPxiqBcIc/7XF25WkQcHG3ePB pFtPrknf4mIyUHgX1mRQpabLTuszaZVhbboHKGwSvycpSzDuwAOt7AzqNoQ7trD7c1 AvKFYfffz3BZQ== To: Daniel Sterling Cc: Jonathan Morton , Michael Richardson , bloat In-Reply-To: References: <32080.1597787724@localhost> <3A782CD0-01F1-40FA-9DFD-B969BD11A566@gmail.com> <87blhq3pdb.fsf@toke.dk> Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2020 13:59:09 +0200 X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Message-ID: <875z7ujgxe.fsf@toke.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Bloat] cake + ipv6 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: Thu, 01 Oct 2020 11:59:14 -0000 Daniel Sterling writes: > On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 11:14 AM Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen wrote: >> It depends. A 'sparse' flow should get consistent priority > >> That's per flow. But you're misunderstanding the 100ms value. That's the >> 'interval', which is (simplifying a bit) the amount of time CAKE will >> wait until it reacts to a flow building a queue. > >> If a flow exceeds its fair share *rate*, >> it'll no longer (from CAKEs) PoV be a 'sparse flow', and it'll get the >> same treatment as all other flows (round-robin scheduling), and if it >> keeps sending at this higher rate, it'll keep being scheduled in this >> way. If the flow is non-elastic (i.e., doesn't slows down in response to >> packet drops), it'll self-congest and you'll see that as increased >> latency. > > Ah! Thank you *very* much for this explanation. I greatly appreciate > the effort everyone in this group puts into explaining (and tolerating > :) ) new users of cake. > > In my case: I am happy to report this is *not* a bug or an issue with > cake, as I originally thought. I am able to reproduce the issue I was > seeing (high ping times as reported by the xbox game's network > monitoring) w/o cake being in the mix at all. So this issue is either > with how I've configured / built openwrt, or with my wireless network > mesh, or with the xbox itself. It is NOT an issue with cake. > > Thank you all very much again. I will continue to use and test cake > and let you know if I encounter further issues with cake itself. You're welcome! Happy experimenting :) -Toke