Rong will cover this at a high-level during the IETF AQM session tomorrow. Her slides are posted: ?www.ietf.org/proceedings/88/slides/slides-88-aqm-1.pdf I plan to do a follow-up to the paper you linked to below to give some of the details. Should be ready before IETF89. -Greg From: Aaron Wood > Date: Thursday, October 31, 2013 at 7:23 AM To: bloat > Subject: Re: [Bloat] [aqm] DOCSIS 3.1 support for AQM Thanks for the information. I'd be interested in why you have chosen PIE, e.g., instead of sfq-CoDel. Any pointers to evaluation reports/results? Last time I saw a presentation on this it seemed that CoDel was performing quite well. I think this cablelabs report makes the argument for PIE: http://www.cablelabs.com/downloads/pubs/Active_Queue_Management_Algorithms_DOCSIS_3_0.pdf Mostly in that in the heavy traffic scenarios, PIE outperforms sfq_codel, and in general is a tad bit better than codel, with a simpler implementation (I think). Although I think I take issue with the "heavy traffic" model, but I'm guessing (hoping) that it's based on surveys of customer traffic. 60-110 upstream flows seems like a lot. But it's based around a heavy use of BitTorrent, so maybe that's reasonable for some people. But in all other cases, sfq really blows the doors off of the others. -Aaron