From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <toke@toke.dk>
Received: from mail.toke.dk (mail.toke.dk [45.145.95.4])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 78D9D3CB37
 for <cake@lists.bufferbloat.net>; Fri,  8 Oct 2021 13:59:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= <toke@toke.dk>
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=20161023;
 t=1633715944; bh=u2Cz1HtMFXotzfPLLvdx1VwMRAUqL79nn8FwN8Njl8s=;
 h=From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From;
 b=eL5GzYDrvOuQ75N3Q205421WeGw2X5z3z0XKQG3rIXrV+PibqNwy3JJ7DOmQQQA6/
 1Fx6zA8Vm43YpSLpzf7PekcrY+7NtHjD+K5QorO28mcmffP9zGMBpGVrcNa164i0Y3
 4XfYAfJ31bHaFr3LbroKuBvQq2pDvevRFWDb+E2FuIXfIuVE+lAW8/uKumthNgIK18
 BkS/5Z1tYo72dbpd+vtBiOn/dIhgXQjYqSl5v3Lv0sRg1wVAwMiZgzaB/p5D7Wkozw
 RIBF68b1NEXbU/ukPCAnoU/imrKE6XVA0ePadkjTaxe2P2LATSF9V7ux0UNJNoE7Tf
 8oT5rk3h0x4Zg==
To: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>, Cake List <cake@lists.bufferbloat.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAA93jw46yjqyDb3F3HuUDpnhu86cT-D22uuYBmR2gLFK8jTyEA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAA93jw46yjqyDb3F3HuUDpnhu86cT-D22uuYBmR2gLFK8jTyEA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2021 19:59:04 +0200
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
Message-ID: <878rz3l7o7.fsf@toke.dk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Subject: Re: [Cake] slightly negative deficits
X-BeenThere: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20
Precedence: list
List-Id: Cake - FQ_codel the next generation <cake.lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/options/cake>,
 <mailto:cake-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/cake>
List-Post: <mailto:cake@lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Help: <mailto:cake-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake>,
 <mailto:cake-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2021 17:59:05 -0000

Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> writes:

> I have sometimes thought that allowing the deficit to go negative
> (either one quantum or one mtu) might
> result in slightly better service times, or tcp, or aqm behavior,
> given tcp's requirement for two back to back packets
> to release an ack.

Why? Isn't that just equivalent to raising the quantum?

-Toke