From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lf1-x131.google.com (mail-lf1-x131.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::131]) (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 720633BA8E for ; Mon, 3 Sep 2018 08:26:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-lf1-x131.google.com with SMTP id h64-v6so303088lfi.10 for ; Mon, 03 Sep 2018 05:26:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=e4JDYG0x6SWB7kOviQxLwRRN2ZGizvmkeLpivh3zQXE=; b=WEn7ASQVyTspNk+pbNeSZNp7OFejzygrPzOOys1TuTbRv7qyZRBJmSKXFFsTe76ga3 2lL8HEysv6e9ugvxE4qZOp5Z65+G+ts6fTpBhXfX+lePhevly6C5lk0LYstrF5NCECVM 0NdpRTh+4yd5cOt+JsCTX/fnObgJnGjciUWo9zco9LTVIEJPkX7/XAuT3KXqD7wg47lO CudBouGcI1NEwFEA5/HwNIi/i45QiV3HVzrdJHa3VywXu7fS3Oyps6jsUQ5hB+fjlRZ0 MUWd+cPylDQMf5R96/eShmRBoTVF+WPAbsfR0+S3swK+ZQ5Z29UoXkfRtkzgXlRDF28x m7UA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=e4JDYG0x6SWB7kOviQxLwRRN2ZGizvmkeLpivh3zQXE=; b=QXXBK2THANFnGWeRxJ5EFuZzqpGVxycw7MQKViI/ctlg3+FuwIyrzBwxqo//GpcQS+ tXOHYjJNf4pJopJ7oJNPjDGQwQBGseMFoLaMYivy8xUcZxgO6rghN8NbWED1/CY8P58l 3NEmZnUIsq2Vz15snMA2IPjP5REA4NXjz4z+18m7jIoehq3SF0QhJRUzShVHZK+hRjU1 DVImEKHHZXOEYJM5Qe+4rD3kdEKy9U8gN24JSz5uZ05Fd23cl7IIOCIuFq1GqxwqeUaH Dy+gT3HsvWqG1JHUaBi/AE5T/gTwRsTrXGNkFolKIQp3zOIQhrzXMv2mVSfxApabNd6E wlnA== X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51CewNatuG7d46T3zUWXN7rA0p1J3mwfYIQpNklbmkzfofqPwCH3 fJz4d8QkAuqwrjXDNNQ2nis= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0VdapfX5uh8lKjZd0wWCvQwQNZtZc/PbPX4OsHLD8xfbdzeQ5oh2JKlOgHy2DnOgvJNGN0lamqQ== X-Received: by 2002:a19:c70a:: with SMTP id x10-v6mr6437222lff.148.1535977573290; Mon, 03 Sep 2018 05:26:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jonathartonsmbp.lan (83-245-237-1-nat-p.elisa-mobile.fi. [83.245.237.1]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p11-v6sm3306557ljc.50.2018.09.03.05.26.12 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 03 Sep 2018 05:26:12 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) From: Jonathan Morton In-Reply-To: <87ftyq25q0.fsf@toke.dk> Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2018 15:26:11 +0300 Cc: Dave Taht , Cake List Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <44155B82-EEFA-4769-AD95-5D17EC677905@gmail.com> References: <87ftyq25q0.fsf@toke.dk> To: =?utf-8?Q?Toke_H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) Subject: Re: [Cake] arp flow dissector 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: Mon, 03 Sep 2018 12:26:14 -0000 > On 3 Sep, 2018, at 2:14 pm, Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen = wrote: >=20 > However, in normal operation ARPs should be fairly rare, so adding = this > support to CAKE would mostly be to protect against flooding, wouldn't > it? Mostly it's just for consistency's sake. Currently all ARPs end up in a = single queue together, because they have no IP header and no transport = header to extract any of the components of the usual 5-tuple from. With = IP addresses extracted, they would be correctly associated with their = originating and/or destination hosts for fairness purposes, while still = being in distinct queues from normal traffic. I suspect anyone generating an ARP flood would also be doing a lot of = spoofing, so it's not actually very helpful from that perspective. In = fact, arguably the current behaviour of putting all ARP traffic in a = single queue would be better. Conversely, it's straightforward to imagine a scenario where ARP is a = tiny fraction of the traffic generated by one host, but ARP traffic from = many idle hosts contributes more significantly to the total. Most of = these ARP requests might just be part of a DHCP transaction. - Jonathan Morton