From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wr0-x22c.google.com (mail-wr0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c0c::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2719D3B29E for ; Thu, 6 Apr 2017 04:27:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-wr0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id o21so21690287wrb.2 for ; Thu, 06 Apr 2017 01:27:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:content-transfer-encoding:subject:message-id:date:to :mime-version; bh=ehpgdjVVOCA2Wa3FdCkM5sMC+mCWyd0A/BF0b0DfMqQ=; b=jcUOjnL9zDtCKPsOK7d4L7Awn9WQGXVNJettt98Z4aM52WgErs2mGNgZNHglApntUy H+NEvuQpdd318Y9nuVxA9MZMTMs3neZ5nZJRtfs2b3WmZVYP1KRDhx2XUrh9giotlnHU oD5jJIRUvEUjODr5Y0WUTUGZJXsgswo0/lxEyEDpWTCmisVxRYXE1xsh22SxAHNc5kQ1 DtXcdVJ2FTkbhuLmy2pjS2pXpk7L1kyIoCYgNc5RP3F0hBXN8P4r6j3CO5M5gZArhPqq BMj/wQO8XgjJEBulyIiWqoRJGuY7vGmNXawMyno2ECsxLdnWCXZFYu5o+9f+4xn3iAPo H5yw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:content-transfer-encoding:subject :message-id:date:to:mime-version; bh=ehpgdjVVOCA2Wa3FdCkM5sMC+mCWyd0A/BF0b0DfMqQ=; b=qpMZ6Lq2urlc2cD20IyszQnIoGhQxt7ORMi3yBnnEcxUvsBCLo/M0AQeiShn7HWIJw E0qpOntdOVdN0meOom4QVfMddtfyOerDMfAQEiWCi33fcucRb+eOd08tXGUV4OSjNrK4 3q3lxfNDsLAHICcg9l5dYPIYW2UWB21rD3JouM4zJSpqwS/RPpWF7LmCavHLKGsBx8uh pBH9PrNpDx5RCEj6nivb48dbO6OsC51pPpEwLiiXzWbYUYxAaNRhuDlXMZZMbHKqG+Qf QpQMX53ghh1Br+ToLj98YXDsnX2pvd/vvwTazuNuW2r9RPCTIT2Bbg8shVhloG2LTYKR GE/Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H3wd93kJ4DhEokjsl7kQaG9BI7a1x8cqmnW9gZmzw5dIueYOLiCHyaBVImv6UTwvA== X-Received: by 10.223.156.18 with SMTP id f18mr22776224wrc.113.1491467223817; Thu, 06 Apr 2017 01:27:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.72.0.130] (h-1169.lbcfree.net. [185.99.119.68]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j2sm1191468wrd.26.2017.04.06.01.27.03 for (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 06 Apr 2017 01:27:03 -0700 (PDT) From: Pete Heist Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <2FD59D30-3102-4A3E-A38E-050E438DABF0@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2017 10:27:02 +0200 To: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) Subject: [Cake] flow isolation for ISPs X-BeenThere: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Cake - FQ_codel the next generation List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2017 08:27:05 -0000 Suppose there is a cooperative ISP that has some members who access the = network through a single device (like a router with NAT), while others = use multiple devices and leave routing to the ISPs routers. (No need to = suppose, actually.) There=E2=80=99s fairness at the IP address level (currently with esfq, = maybe soon with Cake), but it's not fair that members with multiple = devices effectively get one hash bucket per device, so if you have more = devices connected at once, you win. There is a table of member ID to a = list of MAC addresses for the member, so if there could somehow be = fairness based on that table and by MAC address, that could solve it, = but I don=E2=80=99t see how it could be implemented. Is it possible to customize the hashing algorithm used for flow = isolation, either with Cake or some other way? The only options I can think of now: - force each member to use only one IP address (probably impractical at = this point with hundreds of members) - use one queue per member in an HTB hierarchy, for example, with = filters matching each member=E2=80=99s devices, but that seems difficult = to manage - wait years for IPv6 deployment, allocate subnets to each member and = wait for qdiscs that have the ability to hash by IPv6 subnet :)