From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wr0-x231.google.com (mail-wr0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c0c::231]) (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 600A33B29E for ; Thu, 6 Apr 2017 05:04:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-wr0-x231.google.com with SMTP id t20so51055186wra.1 for ; Thu, 06 Apr 2017 02:04:23 -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=vbOBLFrRTGkvIbWkoOZjKMWHlWzMHEWtCKqO+1+47x4=; b=ewC7jIoERVTEKp2Wi+F49FL+yo0l+1gJeBMGxgJk+TTT0KtyHtKGz1xHvYS7t2waez zKq8LFDHSYVOakAvW3B60ljsmTEVanA6Pg3bJUPWNvGuDtZ5arPRrAlfN35enkp6XPrK E1iviUSwJWNvZpmtBu7Ht6I5mwnhzjKOcpeyQe4tE7++l1aYjwtqaG06FgaevbZoN9nz aLKH1Vyn5QdpSgm9LaqJ7p3e0/989eKlB3sX1iOTDbMTu8BCPG6/HrTBwObm632Eeuu0 P38hR396mXexbotBePcVuv3I3oE826CMFkNCHjPCzg0jzHJ+xsDI3Ks8E+00ceYRttXA kGHQ== 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=vbOBLFrRTGkvIbWkoOZjKMWHlWzMHEWtCKqO+1+47x4=; b=bljfLDAxGeWuGSE6x/dWYzE5/WX3YYFibO7ZFxbBKYz/dVp784zKNwv+PIciBy7MZu mwyDpEa/OfBy2MnNlOEFUbRn7EuTrLnxu0CNFfKWxy1FPWbBQea/+xVwZwCY8WaacvU+ oFJn6ja9sgPCbfQhlp+jt0jYLkRfbv03Yo0CAwiUxTIEvX/zH4P4frACbCPt31g0RdyF RDouSSEek+v2BXl8veYfOt84GTiTL45/gOSkiOBSVTtPe4CM7AqWNiNaxvjW9vdqbveH zl+2Ij7nsT+GtcrVX/EbGTKb0bFvk51LEMojR7kn277EbNAlhcwkAQOCJJCaMk0Fclle BHHg== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H3ZV4HqqQZityEZZDEZddY1B/mtXMMWyYrjJSMBdvubHJ1o+KEVOrYZNDi5QcYKog== X-Received: by 10.28.7.144 with SMTP id 138mr23531642wmh.125.1491469462227; Thu, 06 Apr 2017 02:04:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.72.0.130] (h-1169.lbcfree.net. [185.99.119.68]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y69sm25609443wmh.27.2017.04.06.02.04.20 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 06 Apr 2017 02:04:21 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) From: Pete Heist In-Reply-To: <2EAA1B56-8CAD-4964-9DD7-99D54B82D44B@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2017 11:04:20 +0200 Cc: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <5E034518-C8CC-4A91-8F32-756BEA73BCD2@gmail.com> References: <2FD59D30-3102-4A3E-A38E-050E438DABF0@gmail.com> <2EAA1B56-8CAD-4964-9DD7-99D54B82D44B@gmail.com> To: Jonathan Morton X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) Subject: Re: [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 09:04:23 -0000 > On Apr 6, 2017, at 10:57 AM, Jonathan Morton = wrote: >=20 >> On 6 Apr, 2017, at 11:27, Pete Heist wrote: >>=20 >> 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.) >>=20 >> 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. >>=20 >> Is it possible to customize the hashing algorithm used for flow = isolation, either with Cake or some other way? >=20 > That is an important use-case, and one that Cake is not presently = designed to explicitly accommodate. Currently, the design assumes a = single Cake instance per subscriber or household, and fairness between = hosts within a household is assumed to be a relatively simple problem. >=20 > Also, Cake=E2=80=99s general philosophy of simplifying configuration = means that it=E2=80=99s unlikely to ever support =E2=80=9Clists=E2=80=9D = or =E2=80=9Ctables=E2=80=9D of explicit parameters. This is a conscious = design decision to enable its use by relative non-experts. Arguably, = even some of the existing options could reasonably be streamlined away. >=20 > With that said, a related qdisc *with* such support is eminently = feasible, and could easily be the focus of a project. I think it would = be worth gathering requirements for such a thing and considering = potential funding sources. I figured as much, but it=E2=80=99s good to know for sure, thanks! Pete