[Bloat] The NetEm qdisc does not work in conjunction with other qdiscs

[Joerg Deutschmann <joerg.deutschmann@fau.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1521 bytes --]

Dear all,

bringing up again the question from a previous message to this list...

https://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/codel/wiki/Best_practices_for_benchmarking_Codel_and_FQ_Codel/#the-netem-qdisc-does-not-work-in-conjunction-with-other-qdiscs
says to not use NetEm together with other qdiscs.

Is this still true?

How could one emulate bottlenecks together with fq_codel?

Best regards
Joerg


On 15.01.24 13:24, O. P. via Bloat wrote:
> 
> Hi there,
> 
> I'm trying to set up a testbed to evaluate different AQM techniques 
> using docker containers.
> My first idea to create congestion was to use netem. However I later 
> came across 
> https://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/codel/wiki/Best_practices_for_benchmarking_Codel_and_FQ_Codel/ <https://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/codel/wiki/Best_practices_for_benchmarking_Codel_and_FQ_Codel/> which discourages using netem. Since the document is from 2014 and also states that "netem has been improving", my question was wether the current netem has improved sufficiently to be used to get realistic results.
> If netem has improved sufficienly, what would be the correct way to use 
> netem along fq, fq-codel or codel for example ?
> If not, is HTB still the best way to perform rate limiting ? Is there a 
> prefered way to combine HTB with AQMs ?
> 
> Best regards
> 
> John
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Bloat mailing list
> Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat

[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 4843 bytes --]