From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-x22e.google.com (mail-wm0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::22e]) (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 F30B13B29E for ; Thu, 23 Nov 2017 04:21:47 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-wm0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id r68so15197237wmr.1 for ; Thu, 23 Nov 2017 01:21:47 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:content-transfer-encoding:subject:message-id:date:to :mime-version; bh=OOcTDCqqaWIIEDNeyzKSQqdkkJVcpaoJxJBZqCmtFV8=; b=o6IhHR0gUXJ1U+QbueKCe+t644HH+VTesGKUthg4nCwWV+Dxy5Ni1ciV4aR6FxYL9A CHlL7wR9Kx0ckFYj8aEYxILo7NF1BypG8wPt7raVfBJH4iss2bKMP7HdOBBJwTkmvSnb jbBnLwcitzYaECL3IJutQJl2owaziou8CYQdOA51AEoju6riig8bvP/pZAtJOb/rW/Tv mcCFnN7aaB2zOgw4/hxLIBTdAusOf7Y933zKa2x7CijQULKMHzWXe8S7MCB6L5HW/5xY oKrx0sevh4Kqq/CNNfMGl9ExyZ+Rhc1VNWhtHRf9bThPlxu265pEuGjX6uBJQMCTTdrK oNWw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:content-transfer-encoding:subject :message-id:date:to:mime-version; bh=OOcTDCqqaWIIEDNeyzKSQqdkkJVcpaoJxJBZqCmtFV8=; b=hGk5ROBM14u5pnFbgJmKDEwO6M+OWQ85MdlH70PeE1rRvlOkvnN1o+oKBJo4zWzAi4 tFfa6woFJlXwnt+TS6nbCboT7yVwA70IMDU91UxmPrIi92R5+Ucqrg9PbXQs+UUjE8dh AfMpCYmykXFeSpj/RVv3TzZHcPRbHH+HpdacFsdYUN8AIWvOomr3WjlUBqnILFZMvXDK qxvoFfPh59Pvl/KkzbupD4FFbnHIjV5mHWS/CaNoosdFzfh8KrrS/OjlN0AZiTR9xZZM T2DBLPyYq0934Q2Za/N5a9oAPwSbd6OfWhLehx4h4yTjLXSopjdRAnm8RdkDoBvpLik6 h7ug== X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX4NwzlFsxmDD+l90YF6gJukXLGHvj9/lOlBIw2xN4K9xg1J9sUl tPjcFeWYi83JnngV7OV42EFQ6Aiu X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMZqPPv6guKZt0lsLcksG0AbC1SQbFBA2o3+OPVbreIzl47KesT9vMTExi2Bya49khs12zP2WA== X-Received: by 10.28.134.133 with SMTP id i127mr6035808wmd.79.1511428906650; Thu, 23 Nov 2017 01:21:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.72.0.130] (h-1169.lbcfree.net. [185.99.119.68]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m133sm8854217wmd.40.2017.11.23.01.21.45 for (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 23 Nov 2017 01:21:45 -0800 (PST) From: Pete Heist Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <71FB183D-F848-4513-A6F6-D03FD0F10769@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2017 10:21:43 +0100 To: Cake List Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) Subject: [Cake] lan keyword affects host fairness 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, 23 Nov 2017 09:21:48 -0000 It seems that the =E2=80=98lan=E2=80=99 keyword (and probably other = lower rtt settings in general) may adversely impact host fairness in = some cases. Is this to be expected? I set up a fairness test with = rrul_be_nflows where one client has 2/2 TCP flows and the other has 8/8 = TCP flows, then ran five tests: = https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1SMXWw2fLfmBRU622urfdvA_Ujsuf_KQ4P3= uyOH1skOM/edit?usp=3Dsharing As can be seen, fairness works well with the default rtt, but with the = lan keyword, it varies from partially fair when rate limiting is used to = as if there=E2=80=99s no fairness at all when unlimited (bql) is used. = So either we could find some problem with my test, or this may at least = need to be documented somewhere... Pete