From: Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>
To: Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>
Cc: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net, Pete Heist <pete@heistp.net>,
George Amanakis <gamanakis@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Cake] Upstream submission of dual-mode fairness patch
Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2019 12:26:03 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49A8FB42-EC0B-41B7-8CE4-888DF3C2A88D@gmx.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5CC769AC-AD0C-40E8-BFCA-6AD2A8162FFC@gmail.com>
Hi Jonathan,
> On Mar 3, 2019, at 10:58, Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 3 Mar, 2019, at 11:53 am, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
>>
>> Doesn't this look like ingress magic being applied selectively to the users based on number of flows? I thought that the idea behind the ingress keyword is to effectively shape harder the more bulk flows are coming in.
>
> No, it simply counts dropped packets against the shaper, as well as those actually transmitted.
Sure, but the question is how is the resulting "pressure" to drop/mark distributed over the existing (bulk) flows.
> There shouldn't be that many packets being dropped to make this much of a difference.
My intuition (probably wrong) is that is not the few packets dropped, but the fact that the the dropping does seem to be restricted to the flows of the IP with more flows, no?
Best Regards
Sebastian
>
> - Jonathan Morton
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-03-03 11:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <mailman.1788.1551352661.3538.cake@lists.bufferbloat.net>
2019-03-01 10:52 ` Pete Heist
2019-03-01 11:01 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2019-03-01 11:55 ` Pete Heist
2019-03-01 14:40 ` Georgios Amanakis
2019-03-01 16:43 ` Pete Heist
2019-03-02 3:02 ` George Amanakis
2019-03-02 4:47 ` George Amanakis
2019-03-02 10:20 ` Pete Heist
2019-03-03 7:19 ` Pete Heist
2019-03-03 9:53 ` Sebastian Moeller
2019-03-03 9:58 ` Jonathan Morton
2019-03-03 11:26 ` Sebastian Moeller [this message]
2019-03-03 12:13 ` Jonathan Morton
2019-03-03 12:53 ` Sebastian Moeller
2019-03-03 16:07 ` Pete Heist
2019-03-03 16:10 ` Jonathan Morton
2019-03-03 16:35 ` Pete Heist
2019-03-03 16:40 ` Jonathan Morton
2019-03-03 18:48 ` Pete Heist
2019-03-03 19:03 ` gamanakis
2019-03-03 19:49 ` Pete Heist
2019-03-04 2:55 ` Georgios Amanakis
2019-03-04 3:17 ` Jonathan Morton
2019-03-04 4:22 ` Ryan Mounce
2019-03-04 8:27 ` Pete Heist
2019-03-04 13:17 ` Pete Heist
2019-03-04 14:36 ` Georgios Amanakis
2019-03-03 12:06 ` Pete Heist
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=49A8FB42-EC0B-41B7-8CE4-888DF3C2A88D@gmx.de \
--to=moeller0@gmx.de \
--cc=cake@lists.bufferbloat.net \
--cc=chromatix99@gmail.com \
--cc=gamanakis@gmail.com \
--cc=pete@heistp.net \
/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