Re: [Cake] lan keyword affects host fairness

[Dave Taht <dave@taht.net>]

Pete Heist <peteheist@gmail.com> writes:

>     On Nov 24, 2017, at 2:49 PM, Pete Heist <peteheist@gmail.com> wrote:
>     
>     
>     Removing the bandwidth keywords altogether and going back to fq_codel’s
>     specification of target and interval would be my personal preference (unless
>     we can figure out how to make the keywords work well with one another in all
>     cases).
>
> To add to my comments, this probably came across as too harsh or discontinuous
> an idea at this stage when we’re in the process of shoring things up- that
> wasn’t my intent!

Well, I expected bumps on trying to get stuff to mainline. This is just
text and documentation. 

The major speedbump would be breaking the xstats API, the testing and
flag day it would entail, etc. I had spare time sufficient to clean
things up, not make major changes like that.

>
> There is the other side that these keywords save people from having to know
> more. Which is better, explaining target and interval to everyone or having them
> use these?

Something that even an ISP could configure.

> I imagine that was the logic that went into it. Also, if it’s not a
> good idea to be changing the configuration interface at this point (and it may
> not be), then there are alternatives, and the man page addition will definitely
> help people. Maybe I’ll make some runs across a range of rtts to understand this
> better…