Re: [Bloat] when does the CoDel part of fq_codel help in the real world?

[Dave Taht <dave@taht.net>]

Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> writes:

> On Tue, 27 Nov 2018, Luca Muscariello wrote:
>
>> link fully utilized is defined as Q>0 unless you don't include the
>> packet currently being transmitted. I do, so the TXtteer is never
>> idle. But that's a detail.
>
> As someone who works with moving packets, it's perplexing to me to
> interact with transport peeps who seem enormously focused on
> "goodput". My personal opinion is that most people would be better off
> with 80% of their available bandwidth being in use without any
> noticable buffer induced delay, as opposed to the transport protocol
> doing its damndest to fill up the link to 100% and sometimes failing
> and inducing delay instead.

+1

I came up with a new analogy today.

Some really like to build dragsters - that go fast but might explode at
the end of the strip - or even during the race!

I like to build churches - that will stand for a 1000 years.

You can reason about stable, deterministic systems, and build other
beautiful structures on top of them. I have faith in churches, not
dragsters.

>
> Could someone perhaps comment on the thinking in the transport
> protocol design "crowd" when it comes to this?