Re: [Cake] second system syndrome

[Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant <kevin@darbyshire-bryant.me.uk>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1783 bytes --]



On 23/12/15 11:43, Dave Taht wrote:
> squashing and washing are both well within the realm of ietf best
> practices. It is highly desirable to have this level of simple control
> on cake for inbound - for example, 90+ of all comcast traffic, no
> matter how originally marked, comes in marked as background, and
> should be changed to best effort on the gateway. Doing so with an
> iptables rule is inefficient and it is difficult (along with the rest
> of sqm-scripts) to hook into other people's iptables rules.
>
> On outbound - frankly I was surprised remarking dns, ntp, and mosh as
> AF42 worked as well as it did, there was only one place where it
> failed (which resulted in the removal of AF42 marking to mosh
> mainline) - MIT. There ARE a few indicators like background and IMM
> that often survive end to end elsewhere.
>
> more extensive remarking, as kevin also wants to do, seems complex.
The idea was a 'simple' extension of washing, namely to be able to
specify the departing dscp for each tin, relying on the incoming tin
classification performed by cake - it wasn't ever going to be a full per
tin '64 dscp to 64 dscp' mapping table - 'easy' to implement, totally
insane to configure and much better handled by port/protocol awareness.
   The original drive was a thought it potentially useful to be able to
specify a different default marking for 'squash/wash' than the default
hard coded '0'.

If 'wash' is a silly idea, then it's a silly idea, end of story - (my
'c' has improved as a result of coding various little bits so it's a win
for me either way)   No matter, there are branches & matching pull
requests for removal of 'wash & squash' to be found in cake & tc github
repos - merge or delete I've no care :-)

Kevin


[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 4816 bytes --]