From: Maximilian Bachl <maximilian.bachl@gmail.com>
To: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: [Bloat] Fair queuing detection for congestion control
Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2022 16:16:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAEXAmbuMHnyrPmHOVdf6OhXm_ou7Bg=4Jr661i07V9wJkPEojg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8E7E8800-E411-4098-AFEC-4B24FA34335C@gmx.de>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1346 bytes --]
Hi Sebastian,
Thank you for your suggestions.
Regarding
a) I slightly modified the algorithm to make it work better with the small
5 ms threshold. I updated the paper on arXiv; it should be online by
Tuesday morning Central European Time. Detection accuracy for
Linux's fq_codel is quite high (high 90s) but it doesn't work that well
with small bandwidths (<=10 Mbit/s).
b) that's a good suggestion. I'm thinking how to do it best since also
every experiment with every RTT/bandwidth was repeated and I'm not sure how
to make a CDF that includes the RTTs/bandwidths and the repetitions.
c) I guess for every experiment with pfifo, the resulting accuracy is a
true negative rate, while for every experiment with fq* the resulting
accuracy is a true positive rate. I updated the paper to include these
terms to make it clearer. Summarizing, the true negative rate is 100%, the
true positive rate for fq is >= 95% and for fq_codel it's also in that
range except for low bandwidths.
In case you're interested in reliable FQ detection but not in the
combination of FQ detection and congestion control, I co-authored another
paper which uses a different FQ detection method, which is more robust but
has the disadvantage of causing packet loss (Detecting Fair Queuing for
Better Congestion Control (https://arxiv.org/abs/2010.08362)).
Regards,
Max
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1656 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-07-03 14:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-06-27 16:23 Maximilian Bachl
2022-07-01 9:37 ` Sebastian Moeller
2022-07-03 14:16 ` Maximilian Bachl [this message]
2022-07-03 14:49 ` Dave Taht
2022-10-12 17:35 ` Maximilian Bachl
2022-10-12 18:16 ` Dave Taht
2022-10-13 14:17 ` Dave Taht
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://lists.bufferbloat.net/postorius/lists/bloat.lists.bufferbloat.net/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAEXAmbuMHnyrPmHOVdf6OhXm_ou7Bg=4Jr661i07V9wJkPEojg@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=maximilian.bachl@gmail.com \
--cc=bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox