General list for discussing Bufferbloat
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>
To: Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr>
Cc: bloat <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: [Bloat] curious.....
Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2013 17:26:32 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <D8FC3123-8BEF-4AF6-834B-CE1EBC744C48@gmx.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <877gbfcw4t.wl%jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr>

Hi Juliusz,

On Dec 8, 2013, at 14:25 , Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr> wrote:

>>> The promise of fq_codel is that we can get rid of our prioritising
>>> hacks -- if we need that kind of features, then fq_codel has
>>> failed.
> 
>> Is that really true? given enough concurrent flows, critical flows
>> might be delayed purely be the round robin scheduling of equally
>> "worthy" packets in fq_codel
> 
> At 100 Mbit, one full-size Ethernet frame is 120us.  This means that
> if you want your VoIP traffic to have less than 30ms delay, you should
> in principle reach your deadline as long as you have fewer than 250
> congestion-limited flows at a given time.

	Well, is 250 enough and are the 250 really realistic in a residential setting? Currently not doing much of anything my router has 142 active connections (according to conntrack) so 250 might be on the low size for a device that routes multiple devices. Plus, unfortunately, most residential internet connections are asymmetric, so on the upload will allow fewer congestion-limited concurrent flows before the round robin delay will impede the VOIP session. (In Germany residential VDSL with 100Mbit/s downlink will run at 40Mbit/s uplink, so hopefully not a big issue, but most cable providers keep the upload below 10Mbit/s, typically 5Mbit/s for 100Mbit/s download).  So we talk about an order of magnitude fewer flows required to make phone calls "interesting".
	So I still think that for VoIP prioritizing might still be required until supplied minimum bandwidth gets higher.

> 
>> so some residual priory system might still make sense...
> 
> For throughput-sharing reasons, perhaps.  For latency reasons, hopefully not.

	Even at 1000 symmetric I still think it would be a good idea to isolate really latency critical traffic from the rest, even if under normal circumstances there should be no problem, I guess a "better safe than sorry" approach. But, hey I do not do this for a living so I might be on the wrong track here.

best
	Sebastian

> 
> -- Juliusz


  reply	other threads:[~2013-12-08 16:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-12-03 18:40 Outback Dingo
2013-12-03 22:25 ` Kenyon Ralph
2013-12-04  0:25   ` Outback Dingo
2013-12-04  0:38     ` Dave Taht
2013-12-06 17:19       ` Juliusz Chroboczek
2013-12-06 18:15         ` Dave Taht
2013-12-07 11:24           ` Sebastian Moeller
2013-12-10 19:05             ` Dave Taht
2013-12-11 10:44               ` Sebastian Moeller
2013-12-07 12:59           ` Juliusz Chroboczek
2013-12-08  1:27             ` Steinar H. Gunderson
2013-12-08  5:24               ` Mikael Abrahamsson
2013-12-08 11:00                 ` Mark Constable
2013-12-08 14:01                   ` Outback Dingo
2013-12-08 14:03                     ` Outback Dingo
2013-12-08 16:44                     ` Mark Constable
2013-12-08 19:00                       ` Sebastian Moeller
2013-12-08 13:12                 ` Juliusz Chroboczek
2013-12-08 16:46                   ` Jonathan Morton
2013-12-08 16:51                   ` Dave Taht
2013-12-08 17:56                     ` Juliusz Chroboczek
2013-12-08 21:05                       ` Jonathan Morton
2013-12-08 14:22                 ` Aaron Wood
2013-12-08 14:41                 ` Jim Gettys
2013-12-08 10:40             ` Sebastian Moeller
2013-12-08 13:25               ` Juliusz Chroboczek
2013-12-08 16:26                 ` Sebastian Moeller [this message]
2013-12-08 17:47                   ` Juliusz Chroboczek
2013-12-08 19:02                     ` Sebastian Moeller
2013-12-22  1:38                       ` Dan Siemon
2013-12-22  3:46                         ` Stephen Hemminger
2013-12-08 19:01                   ` Jonathan Morton
2013-12-08 19:21                     ` Sebastian Moeller
2013-12-08 16:01               ` Neil Davies
2013-12-08 20:41 Hal Murray
2013-12-08 23:16 ` Stephen Hemminger
2013-12-09  9:51 ` Sebastian Moeller

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=D8FC3123-8BEF-4AF6-834B-CE1EBC744C48@gmx.de \
    --to=moeller0@gmx.de \
    --cc=bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net \
    --cc=jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr \
    /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