From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lpp01m010-f43.google.com (mail-lpp01m010-f43.google.com [209.85.215.43]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA5B6200DE1 for ; Sat, 4 Feb 2012 18:05:43 -0800 (PST) Received: by lagp5 with SMTP id p5so4490273lag.16 for ; Sat, 04 Feb 2012 18:05:41 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=ePrD7k4Zi/apGUdgvhVfEpzfQGWp8kXyit6i3JHP0eM=; b=eItYoUJap9rhym/4WwSH3X23hCsAH37uW2kTIXzZLjLgPw9DANQ24qSu6A1DBhKPHm 5Fip3ywghss4ScvOc5X+qTDR4P6/B3QdZA8GVsYSs1GUbBuKl66y8oAe753+VSyTIiMT 0qTTbW233Neu2iFYblTqXmSlVDbn9EU5moI4A= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.152.104.202 with SMTP id gg10mr6685791lab.2.1328407541275; Sat, 04 Feb 2012 18:05:41 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.152.24.74 with HTTP; Sat, 4 Feb 2012 18:05:41 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <1325481751.2526.23.camel@edumazet-laptop> <4F046F7B.6030905@freedesktop.org> <40C8C302-7B23-4272-8322-1D916BB0CEB2@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2012 21:05:41 -0500 Message-ID: From: john thompson To: "George B." Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d040890179d5ba104b82dfbbb Cc: bloat Subject: Re: [Bloat] What is fairness, anyway? was: Re: finally... winning on wired! X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 05 Feb 2012 02:05:44 -0000 --f46d040890179d5ba104b82dfbbb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Some firewalls (like sonicwall enhanced) can slow down acks to traffic shape inbound traffic. It's not perfect, but it's often better than nothing. Most business-class ISP's should offer QOS in both directions. We certainly do for our T-1 or better customers. (sorry, I meant this to be a reply all) On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 8:57 PM, George B. wrote: > On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 4:43 PM, Jonathan Morton > wrote: > > > There are two good things you can do. > > > > 1) Pressure your ISP to implement managed queueing and ECN at the > head-end device, eg. DSLAM or cell-tower, and preferably at other > vulnerable points in their network too. > > Well, if they have a Cisco network, that might work. Few other > network gear vendors actively support ECN. > > > 2) Implement TCP *receive* window management. This prevents the TCP > algorithm on the sending side from attempting to find the size of the > queues in the network. Search the list archives for "Blackpool" to see m= y > take on this technique in the form of a kernel patch. More sophisticated > algorithms are doubtless possible. > > Probably not something I want to use in production. > > Thanks, Johnathan. Now yet another question: > > Two different server configurations (these are real life examples, by the > way): > > 1. eth0 and eth1 bound as bond0 with vlans hanging off of them. > Where to put the qdisc? On the bond interface? On the Ethernet > interfaces? On the vlan interfaces? > > 2. eth0 and eth1 have vlan interfaces attached as eth0.10, eth1.10 > and eth0.20, eth1.20. Those are bound to bond interfaces, bond10 and > bond20. Same question, where best to apply the qdisc. > > George > _______________________________________________ > Bloat mailing list > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat > --=20 =93The world is not comprehensible, but it is embraceable.=94 --f46d040890179d5ba104b82dfbbb Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Some firewalls (li= ke sonicwall enhanced) can slow down acks to traffic shape inbound traffic.= =A0It's not perfect, but it's often better than nothing. =A0=A0
Most business-class ISP's should offer QOS in both direc= tions. =A0We certainly do for our T-1 or better customers. =A0
(sorry, I meant this to be a reply all)

On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 8:57 PM, George B. <georgeb@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 4:43 PM, Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com> wrote:
> There are two good things you can do.
>
> 1) Pressure your ISP to implement managed queueing and ECN at the head= -end device, eg. DSLAM or cell-tower, and preferably at other vulnerable po= ints in their network too.

Well, if they have a Cisco network, that might work. =A0Few other
network gear vendors actively support ECN.

> 2) Implement TCP *receive* window management. =A0This prevents the TCP= algorithm on the sending side from attempting to find the size of the queu= es in the network. =A0Search the list archives for "Blackpool" to= see my take on this technique in the form of a kernel patch. =A0More sophi= sticated algorithms are doubtless possible.

Probably not something I want to use in production.

Thanks, Johnathan. =A0 Now yet another question:

Two different server configurations (these are real life examples, by the w= ay):

1. =A0eth0 and eth1 bound as bond0 with vlans hanging off of them.
Where to put the qdisc? =A0On the bond interface? =A0On the Ethernet
interfaces? =A0On the vlan interfaces?

2. =A0eth0 and eth1 have vlan interfaces attached as eth0.10, eth1.10
and eth0.20, eth1.20. =A0Those are bound to bond interfaces, bond10 and
bond20. =A0Same question, where best to apply the qdisc.

George
_____________________= __________________________
Bloat mailing list
Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net<= /a>
= https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat



--
= =93The world is not comprehensible, but it is embraceable.=94
--f46d040890179d5ba104b82dfbbb--