From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <swmike@swm.pp.se>
Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (swm.pp.se [212.247.200.143])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E39623B29E
 for <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>; Sun,  7 Oct 2018 23:36:39 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501)
 id 486C3AF; Mon,  8 Oct 2018 05:36:38 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=swm.pp.se; s=mail;
 t=1538969798; bh=LQTesQwFKUut1TaBzCXTzlkj+6Yfn+jWC5Q5FexX5IE=;
 h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From;
 b=q2HsjvQYoZ6EKXKgcUizCfIkN407jmBeTKyM2nQmcFAhQmaldGcBnScAuOVI2T+Cf
 h3vszO26ZaMX8JXimWFDiXkrVGie5yDKQxopAtyfUvEPVUMCoSA8BKkShSi/FrBPvt
 oEsCRm7qHsgo4B2Ql9Ny9U1lBCMdwq6Qaqu2fCvs=
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44B599F;
 Mon,  8 Oct 2018 05:36:38 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2018 05:36:38 +0200 (CEST)
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: Aaron Wood <woody77@gmail.com>
cc: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>, bloat <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>
In-Reply-To: <CALQXh-OipLJEfJvQtevCF7mszMzJUoXdy-HXQNZUH19QXVp=3w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1810080534100.4550@uplift.swm.pp.se>
References: <CAA93jw64j=+qq++jjZwVRJY8QcTMW-Cesn+Z_3O0L+cDmXqgwQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <4be3777e-b056-eaea-a06e-34186958c179@gmail.com>
 <CAJ_ENFGggzz31vsC2zTYDQo_V=bOxt4XZ8mskZ6Vsv0oVfgQ7Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA93jw7n4WjJbBqqyF=zSTSHmkHWmMsZVG5p1a3BiO-e=3Jb6g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALQXh-OipLJEfJvQtevCF7mszMzJUoXdy-HXQNZUH19QXVp=3w@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07)
Organization: People's Front Against WWW
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Subject: Re: [Bloat] first bufferbloat free cablemodem?
X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20
Precedence: list
List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat <bloat.lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/options/bloat>,
 <mailto:bloat-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/bloat>
List-Post: <mailto:bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bloat-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat>,
 <mailto:bloat-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Oct 2018 03:36:40 -0000

On Sun, 7 Oct 2018, Aaron Wood wrote:

> Maybe he's on a DOCSIS 3.1 headend that's also using pie?  Pie doesn't need
> to know the outbound rate, correct?  as it's meant to be driven by the
> RTS/CTS type behavior that the upstream traffic on cable has (the correct
> terms for cable aren't coming to mind at the moment).

Correct, PIE acts on the queue just like CODEL. From what I can tell, PIE 
is a queue discipline that can be implemented on hardware that supports 
WRED (which most can) with the help of extra software and some CPU cycles 
to tune it over time. That's why HW manufacturers like PIE.

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se