From: Pete Heist <pete@eventide.io>
To: Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>
Cc: "Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@toke.dk>, cake@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: [Cake] Pre-print of Cake paper available
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 09:15:20 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6A13BD7F-D682-4864-B5DB-2352C1C3F529@eventide.io> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <311BE3FC-9211-4B33-AD46-444F21E2A38A@gmail.com>
> On Apr 24, 2018, at 7:58 AM, Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Turning NAT support on by default might actually be reasonable, since it doesn't really break anything if it's not needed - it just eats a bit of CPU with unnecessary conntrack lookups.
I would be for it, if it eats say < 1% additional CPU, and preferably less. I expect the impact to increase with packet rates.
> For the flowmodes, basically triple-isolate's raison d'être is to be a reasonable default which (usually) gives most of the benefits of the "dual" modes, without needing to know a-priori anything about network topology. In the most typical application, the distinction can be seen in whether the qdisc is attached to an IFB or a physical interface, but in deployments that we'd *like* to see, the opposite cases easily occur. To do anything more sophisticated, we'd need to watch some traffic and guess after a while, and that doesn't feel right.
Yeah, I see. The same could be done with nat. There could be an auto-detect phase where nat lookups are performed and not to determine if it’s needed. But if these detections didn’t work with near-perfect reliability, it would complicate troubleshooting.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-04-24 7:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-04-23 8:39 Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2018-04-23 9:54 ` Jonathan Morton
2018-04-23 23:01 ` Pete Heist
2018-04-23 23:31 ` Jonathan Morton
2018-04-24 5:44 ` Pete Heist
2018-04-24 5:58 ` Jonathan Morton
2018-04-24 7:15 ` Pete Heist [this message]
2018-04-24 7:56 ` Sebastian Moeller
2018-04-24 8:45 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2018-04-24 8:57 ` Pete Heist
2018-04-25 18:44 ` David Lang
2018-04-25 20:28 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2018-04-26 19:27 ` Pete Heist
2018-04-27 11:08 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2018-04-27 11:20 ` Pete Heist
2018-04-24 8:17 ` Sebastian Moeller
2018-04-24 8:47 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2018-04-24 8:50 ` Jonathan Morton
2018-04-24 9:06 ` Pete Heist
2018-04-24 9:15 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2018-04-24 9:36 ` Pete Heist
2018-04-24 9:18 ` Sebastian Moeller
2018-04-24 9:30 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2018-04-24 9:38 ` Sebastian Moeller
2018-04-24 9:44 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2018-04-24 15:08 ` John Yates
2018-04-24 8:43 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
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=6A13BD7F-D682-4864-B5DB-2352C1C3F529@eventide.io \
--to=pete@eventide.io \
--cc=cake@lists.bufferbloat.net \
--cc=chromatix99@gmail.com \
--cc=toke@toke.dk \
/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