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 15:04:57 +0200 (CEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1904021459020.3490@uplift.swm.pp.se> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <47CA8CDA-3060-40C2-AC0A-04899F08C9DE@gmx.de>
On Tue, 2 Apr 2019, Sebastian Moeller wrote:
> See above how Deutsche Telekom deals with that issue, at least in
> the German market.
I've read rumours about some ISPs implementing interaction with the VDSL
DSLAM where there is an estimation of the current link-speed for each
individual customer and then it tries to set the BNG egress shaper
appropriately.
I am very happy about my FTTH solution I have now since from what I can
see the L2 network is almost never a limiting factor (much better than my
DOCSIS connection) so my bidirectional SQM with CAKE seems to work very
well.
Still, the HGW can never solve these problems properly, the egress shaping
in the BNG needs to do a proper job. From what I have been told, there has
been improvements here in the past few years.
What I am more worried about is the egress shaping from the HGW. I talked
to several vendors at BBF and they talked about ingress policing being
commonly used on the BNG. This means no ingress shaping at all (just
packet drops if they exceed the configured rate). I don't know about
buffering on the HGW though and how the policed rate is set compared to
the L2 rate the HGW can send via.
--
Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-04-02 13:04 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
2019-04-02 12:35 ` Sebastian Moeller
2019-04-02 13:04 ` Mikael Abrahamsson [this message]
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.2.20.1904021459020.3490@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