From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (ipv6.swm.pp.se [IPv6:2a00:801::f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D78363CB35 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 2018 08:49:54 -0500 (EST) Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id 32949B9; Tue, 27 Nov 2018 14:49:53 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=swm.pp.se; s=mail; t=1543326593; bh=NfX2hB/5nYJ4twMJeVG63sTiLxrLTukppCldcnBYBjI=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=x8BT9CCBCAp1xayG+29zAFyzbUf7EoWodE+lAIEMHd21XM0lFmz9FDSAcs+06B2As 5jI+ndpx/emO6QurCGSdddoM2nBxX5Z81+M1zfqZkfHkZNVSElRV/948Swyd4MBXhp DRatEL43gGmJyzFMBbMtSWfrCO7K/ExbNIACwK9U= Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EF23B6; Tue, 27 Nov 2018 14:49:53 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2018 14:49:53 +0100 (CET) From: Mikael Abrahamsson To: Luca Muscariello cc: bloat In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <65EAC6C1-4688-46B6-A575-A6C7F2C066C5@heistp.net> <86b16a95-e47d-896b-9d43-69c65c52afc7@kit.edu> 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] when does the CoDel part of fq_codel help in the real world? 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: Tue, 27 Nov 2018 13:49:55 -0000 On Tue, 27 Nov 2018, Luca Muscariello wrote: > If you, Mikael don't want more than 10ms buffer, how do you achieve that? class class-default random-detect 10 ms 2000 ms That's the only thing available to me on the platforms I have. If you would like this improved, please reach out to the Cisco ASR9k BU and tell them to implement ECN and PIE (or something even better). They won't do it because I say so, it seems. WRED is all they give me. > You change the behaviour of the source and hope flow isolation is available. Sorry, I only transport the packets, I don't create them. > If you just cut the buffer down to 10ms and do nothing else, the only thing > you get is a short queue and may throw away half of your link capacity. If i have lots of queue I might instead get customer complaints about high latency for their interactive applications. -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se