From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>
Cc: bloat <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>,
Jonathan Foulkes <jfoulkes@evenroute.com>
Subject: Re: [Bloat] number of home routers with ingress AQM
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2019 14:10:07 +0200 (CEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1904021358460.3490@uplift.swm.pp.se> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ED9289F4-B466-432F-ABD3-C5F14EC5DAA3@gmx.de>
On Tue, 2 Apr 2019, Sebastian Moeller wrote:
> I just wondered if anybody has any reasonable estimate how many
> end-users actually employ fair-queueing AQMs with active ECN-marking for
> ingress traffic @home? I am trying to understand whether L4S approach to
> simply declare these as insignificant in number is justifiable?
If more than 0.01% of HGWs did this I'd be extremely surprised.
> I know in openwrt with sqm that is the default, but I have no idea about
To configure ingress shaping you actually have to know the speed and
configure it. It's not the default. Also, it's useless if the transport
network queues the packets at lower rate than at what you receive it. When
I used my DOCSIS connection it routinely forwarded packets at lower rates
than what I bought (and had configured the ingress shaper for).
> the number of devices that actually use sqm in the field; @Jonathan:
> does evenroute have numbers you are willing to share, like total numbers
> or % of iqrouters with ecn-marking ingress routing active?
ISP networks typically looks like this in the ISP->HGW direction:
BNG->L2->L2->HGW
This is the same regardless if it's DSL, DOCSIS, FTTH/PON or whatever. So
shaping is done egress on BNG and it tries to send at lower rate than any
of the L2 devices. Generally there is no ingress shaping of any kind on
the HGW, it doesn't even know what speed the subscription is.
--
Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-04-02 12:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-04-02 11:38 Sebastian Moeller
2019-04-02 12:10 ` Mikael Abrahamsson [this message]
2019-04-02 12:35 ` Sebastian Moeller
2019-04-02 13:04 ` Mikael Abrahamsson
2019-04-02 13:28 ` Sebastian Moeller
2019-04-02 13:33 ` Ryan Mounce
2019-04-02 14:11 ` Jonathan Foulkes
2019-04-02 21:10 ` Ryan Mounce
2019-04-02 14:14 ` Jonathan Foulkes
2019-04-02 14:58 ` Sebastian Moeller
2019-04-02 13:51 ` Jonathan Foulkes
2019-04-02 14:14 ` Jonathan Foulkes
2019-04-02 16:20 ` Jonathan Morton
2019-04-02 16:38 ` Sebastian Moeller
2019-04-02 13:15 ` Ryan Mounce
2019-04-02 13:34 ` Mikael Abrahamsson
2019-04-02 13:38 ` Ryan Mounce
2019-04-02 14:02 ` Mikael Abrahamsson
2019-04-02 13:34 ` Sebastian Moeller
2019-04-02 23:23 ` Ryan Mounce
2019-04-03 8:16 ` Sebastian Moeller
2019-04-03 10:09 ` Jonathan Morton
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=alpine.DEB.2.20.1904021358460.3490@uplift.swm.pp.se \
--to=swmike@swm.pp.se \
--cc=bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net \
--cc=jfoulkes@evenroute.com \
--cc=moeller0@gmx.de \
/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