From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lf0-x232.google.com (mail-lf0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::232]) (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 E808B3B25E; Thu, 6 Oct 2016 04:18:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-lf0-x232.google.com with SMTP id l131so8625906lfl.2; Thu, 06 Oct 2016 01:18:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=p0l3sL55F+wcax815DYgCq76euDsE1p/hEZ3rIuKwTo=; b=t0GCt3lDiOBMRxNektTPKoGS0gcLsDJdAOCdHa1mEFTKI0Kyk31a/11gAilfpRJhtR e54uM2osRk/OtqL6e9mD5o1qMAlPvsXLfQNfapgaPrZRCqrytgY1Rq+8QlPoaYVQDYwJ x31TL5SuOOaLkJLDtlaTOEso19R68FQHtUQbVP4V++axDiX+dcYwf8+O35SzhTB2cl8k Yv4VUplwODkajHvCfsrU7Ob1eRB2bXwkwgpwEq42XO6Ni3aqFufqSgAqUDRaiTymoHl8 F9PgMeK8MWCvfQz4OxtWjrRQKZhDxMSF6OKrBWniTwbWRa6ee6pdlNL35rYdMvLhL3Nv nwPQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=p0l3sL55F+wcax815DYgCq76euDsE1p/hEZ3rIuKwTo=; b=QbrKS2BGgiWsHo+TZ/VOocRsCQ8+GY751UbX9uSgVVxSwajY0Els31ylkikH8nGZAq DT+zI7179o1odrBBUE1+Ftv9oJKtloPhgkBMzssaunhmGe+2BdJsLGSOyC2QG0gVP8qb f3O9Uf++nzg4SU2AkbclhY9kgt0QNrRsC/Fmclt7YiOvAOw/c3w/hRmwlBKVkb6mvtph XhBmxdXiWT8272cV11KB4qbgFjbrfvidk8uQ2bYPJmabykvOi9eij1wZRRwklRwDy3mx hrJ+741EKW+EPzvt0f7nGY8lqkeNgmrSzZ1z+sh/1XN3SR1cLgk+mKAPSnOYsBTbOJBB xawQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AA6/9RmiuGOrlytBy0dVVjbvV9m2sDjuHh1lnLW7a/5s1uWGblWE2w807yFIj6maBwGpOw== X-Received: by 10.46.33.98 with SMTP id h95mr4587531ljh.53.1475741925630; Thu, 06 Oct 2016 01:18:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.100.13] (37-33-90-35.bb.dnainternet.fi. [37.33.90.35]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f65sm2348539lji.32.2016.10.06.01.18.44 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 06 Oct 2016 01:18:45 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) From: Jonathan Morton In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 11:18:43 +0300 Cc: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net, "codel@lists.bufferbloat.net" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <8A8AD108-7D52-43F9-9C25-94D2FE2F6BFE@gmail.com> References: To: Dave Taht X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) Subject: Re: [Cake] [RFC PATCH] Don't give malicious CE senders a free ride 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 Oct 2016 08:18:47 -0000 > On 6 Oct, 2016, at 07:28, Dave Taht wrote: >=20 > After doing myself in with BBR not respecting CE marks, I'm now = thinking > that perhaps the right thing for red/fq_codel/cake/pie/etc to do is = actually > *drop* stuff that it sees that is already CE marked, when it too wants > to mark, instead of giving it a free ride. >=20 > It's an unfriendly world out there. I=E2=80=99m consciously relying on FQ behaviour and the BLUE component = of COBALT to take care of flows unresponsive to CE marks. They harm = their own latency and don=E2=80=99t get (much) improvement in = throughput, FQ keeps them from impacting other flows, and BLUE starts = dropping if their window growth is unbounded. - Jonathan Morton