From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ej1-x632.google.com (mail-ej1-x632.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::632]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 293403CB38 for ; Tue, 1 Feb 2022 19:37:42 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-ej1-x632.google.com with SMTP id s5so59356334ejx.2 for ; Tue, 01 Feb 2022 16:37:42 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc :content-transfer-encoding; bh=CTU1X5YslyC7Mdo7/RUFdwzoV7RRADMUuCJBg3kuDsA=; b=AHlOA9Ov7OlMZEGqy/H97mEdr1UfSQQpeyzDfS7bidMigwupdrehHJHkDl1+X9Lt0b winOQWnLhXiztzOdKgBd+3jm5GwvOdcWyUImnjAsTnNPjfMMARAbpGlLCudx3avxq2Jj s4Vnt744NALrt/4+Fz9b9gY7U7qeS9TgrJ6X4oHR91evitbWmPFA0u3uer/khl1AtjEu 8z6JGmukBx5PHwPIspuLU9RavOi3vmVX0eFpOEKTazw82P+8ZPUukLUCIq04qGR0gxLD 4to2XEouuqhyju4q4nqatGbxF/aSLay3/EM+jVci31b6QCMRtMWyBKpGfodGsnqZ4Ute 3hvg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc :content-transfer-encoding; bh=CTU1X5YslyC7Mdo7/RUFdwzoV7RRADMUuCJBg3kuDsA=; b=6BnfyoWLhMp5z27RohUlTfY0HM3oRouzWPv6XzME+9xpLO1pxpeQ0/ncPKmNTTUqx7 jV9SEFzNFHhICFDjmiD871Wxtg6r2BebFjUGMubUGxKcmYL7rG2BEli9fO8x/OxSICiV EWDvmDznQlWr2GJTwZiHa007vr++ohbGjb1/BACNtZM3P2lv2bLPGvBNaIHsCsMmtBp0 cwu6dg1Le1+//Cd171+IlD38L+k55FJQ4P64bGyM1Rlfn3t8KneXYOTQVvrmEqZ2Oyup 9jOiWoERV1NgudVX7oqSOaZe92E7sBtN/sfvLAJU7Xd/53AswLnXeD0jShgGw0hyjY3+ OEsA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531fjXqpX08PiNqWPdEV3SeS49LpvSDwqdt2s9xHTEQtm02JJ2Bk GQ/x0vYzNdpi7+Xju7YhYc3G5+CH4mbL9z2cuA1nOL3BBl4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxik6/2mcQHudclJXL3Gb+NISqFReKRRLttt4NAPu1wvECZMIwwlS8ZoMWvnh7iCwjgXkJksq6wNGh+7Y5SdFA= X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:1624:: with SMTP id hb36mr22566015ejc.183.1643762260807; Tue, 01 Feb 2022 16:37:40 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Dave Taht Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2022 16:37:28 -0800 Message-ID: To: bloat Cc: andrzej.chydzinski@polsl.pl Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [Bloat] AQM based on the queue length: A real-network study 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: Wed, 02 Feb 2022 00:37:42 -0000 see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=3D10.1371/journal.pone.02= 63407 I'm not sure if I like this experiment or not. On the one hand, I *love* that they are experimenting on real workloads, on the other, well, have a go at reading it through. I like a lot that, given how positive the results were verses a fifo, (e.g. anything is better than a fifo) that they could keep the experiment in place, varying as they do time of day, etc, and could maybe also run experiments vs a vs fq-codel, sch_cake, pie, fq-pie, etc. --=20 I tried to build a better future, a few times: https://wayforward.archive.org/?site=3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.icei.org Dave T=C3=A4ht CEO, TekLibre, LLC