From: Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>
To: moeller0 <moeller0@gmx.de>
Cc: "Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@toke.dk>, cake@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: [Cake] cake/tc - removal of atm/ptm/ethernet specific overhead keywords
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 18:10:06 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1A507BE4-35F2-4B09-98C8-915D15EAA641@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7E9009E9-DB53-4B0E-90F5-5DC3171BEC89@gmx.de>
> On 2 Jun, 2016, at 17:59, moeller0 <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
>
> As I tried to convey before the matter is far from simple. For example my ISP, DTAG, has at least 4 different sets of per packet overhead (ATM versus PTM, BRAS versus BNG) so even for this one ISP there is not one solution to the issue. And with BRAS/BNG shaping as used by say DTAG the actual VDLS2 related overhead becomes irrelevant compared to the overhead setting of that applied policer. I believe trying to simplify this complexity will lead to false overhead recommendations. I would rather direct people to better documentation how to deduce the overhead by measurements and research…
I think we can make a couple of usefully simplifying assumptions:
1: The encapsulation overhead on the wire is the same in both directions.
2: The BRAS is irrelevant, because we need to set an ingress qdisc below the line rate anyway in order to exert control, and the BRAS doesn’t apply on upload.
Does that help at all?
- Jonathan Morton
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-06-02 15:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-06-02 9:37 Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant
2016-06-02 14:22 ` Jonathan Morton
2016-06-02 14:27 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2016-06-02 14:49 ` Jonathan Morton
2016-06-02 15:42 ` moeller0
2016-06-02 17:40 ` Jonathan Morton
2016-06-02 18:53 ` moeller0
2016-06-02 18:55 ` Jonathan Morton
2016-06-02 19:17 ` moeller0
2016-06-02 14:59 ` moeller0
2016-06-02 15:10 ` Jonathan Morton [this message]
2016-06-02 15:33 ` moeller0
2016-06-02 14:51 ` moeller0
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/cake.lists.bufferbloat.net/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1A507BE4-35F2-4B09-98C8-915D15EAA641@gmail.com \
--to=chromatix99@gmail.com \
--cc=cake@lists.bufferbloat.net \
--cc=moeller0@gmx.de \
--cc=toke@toke.dk \
/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