From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DEDA73CB35 for ; Tue, 23 Nov 2021 02:35:47 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1637652946; bh=KMDvvOhkdjGRPFclMZLjrs8lFfizWrHjS2AothzsTQo=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Date:From:To:CC:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=AeyCvEP73SnO6GlkVaQhqbj+62qziBbEYZs1OsT2HrYBs2SIYS2R8fiei4Yd4txzk a4K1/hSiF77rhTyeXy/VhxJ2GNXUM1bk2Lm/zWacJAyInY2jlJ3Ulu19flR5edlqSL plVtCLynnpRL1As6dlONEqCnDLFDeSvWLuNpm1DQ= X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([80.187.108.241]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx005 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MHXBj-1mu7Au3MC9-00DaB4; Tue, 23 Nov 2021 08:35:45 +0100 Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2021 08:35:48 +0100 From: Sebastian Moeller To: Dave Taht CC: Cake List User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android In-Reply-To: References: <67BC6CC2-F088-4C0D-8433-A09F4AC452FE@gmx.de> Message-ID: <90677BA1-6718-4596-BACD-C2943D109093@gmx.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:yTUirf8xANrHe4nmOWoX4qI7FCrAT1nV8YJ3UX8BRJ3mOf4S9mA SQ1i4TwppcH9wmpaaGAhVpZDh0vd03UdUvPYBTSWQtLyXpeBchbjc4kJC26R7GEBCU0pz2K qY5YfcfE6+HWq5KDcvcY0YeexYm75+oRKSMr46BJk5U82pjxp57kUtPj4o868/1nsffrhkH zo7TRK/J+pNan+iVaWEOw== X-Spam-Flag: NO X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:Ceunn35HFQ0=:ayoKe4V9HPhmp5XAzyAFG5 v6QWlgM7KhIno+Q4Antccwq86TBoETMsz2nvcLvFHjwMOwa34lhHpbUSIU2epbQnYDFWkpb0C 3OqJAEAnW3YZHphoEi2sSkbf2iczti48wCjBWwRRzu45XsunpQarAmQHRJvjqbHeYziQPFafH Z+8KsvVwXqHOaAH0Mdyp/4GgmXcqoo8aQsWLyiujjQalJLcgNVwYaV513W6bOz8nTsu0eVKUS yB+bCaXM6IjsLSiO7weSinql8aLwjDsf4/TPKr4zSbuQiMj02yz2B4fnADWO4+EWvHqC/7pwy xODUKRi+UPJrcdn5Xg8VN80MrIPUzOt03XI68jgjJGpxmM+c6fk7bLkmKbF2Ek4Rv+zQOkh/8 nlu8wNHoH+kh2qtLZa13oVtmjNz95uJovvVv3cwjhs8bD0vSgYSQo4fHavB49VXuQqXRloquf K9AZsrzoy1KBpsi5uq1w1vmwNYDX3HLU7u/kUMlZNF5kF8a7/2hLXPX38mPeR+FXMQ8JDmM1s x9t/+JmtTb6VeEqEpIsI8NP3jMmWy4zecFLlGloQPzqrEjRomW68uptRfTcCgYpUvPfCCXmJ/ DVuHSRrOI2CwAyoUFy+1H1296eBRuz0C7rNKBJa3buGBWD3ndGJiWg1hcD7c+UlCVy5qaZzwC vXOhfWM6VZeI46yml2MeygkGy4s2Qnow6R196+a3cyGojiUaoJwTmZd5oxXNEWATJSRjwjM8W COE6cvT5AHaodCz4cHCwkEpLRZ8iQofGUFj4KFuCN56b1isV2CHl8JL2dlTTwXrWQSq8dp+kr 7CO+GF9dvKJFk/6Se1qDs2of4Ayp+hmKMTLJJng8F2IlQVcRyDp0rhWa4vpXwZhNuytXAMo9e KDamcPMRKtseoPB3uZBBNhZ/5hix+6YUWIyqyUshdMNJIPJmTh4ArlxiQNywRYuGwQQ2QiaSF kj1ahKyomgGOtW+lyZJyI1w+jyyBNGiNY5o5gm7czh+JImJCfkTG61IdFsiv2JR7NLSWKUOfD wu4ZHrb6VDyksp3b649GAGARjvr4zLTOtSa3zadka6nHsWQZRJCqKwMUiJpVjawLubF/TKtgI /VWWriIJ/SIrJE= Subject: Re: [Cake] tossing acks into the background queue 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: Tue, 23 Nov 2021 07:35:48 -0000 Hi Dave, On 23 November 2021 08:17:38 CET, Dave Taht wrot= e: >On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 11:07 PM Sebastian Moeller wr= ote: >> >> Hi Dave, >> >> >> On 23 November 2021 06:03:03 CET, Dave Taht w= rote: >> >ages ago I'd (we'd? I really don't remember - forgive me if I've >> >forgotten who actually leaned in on it) written a basic ack-filter in >> >ebpf=2E this was before cake gained tc actions and my primary use for >> >the tech was for asymmetric connections, and before the good >> >ack-filter arrived, and I was (and remain) unfriendly to this level of >> >dpi=2E >> > >> >That said, on a symmetric connection, deprioritizing pure acks to the >> >5% background queue nd then turning the cake ack-filter loose on it >> >might actually work=2E >> > >> >Am I on drugs/is there any point? >> >> I think at leat when using multiple priority tins forward and reverse t= raffic should by default use the same tin (I can see non-standard situation= s that want differential treatment)=2E The argument is that unlike earlier = attempts at ingress shaping that tried to throttle reverse ACKs? cake/codel= do proper 'hit the brakes' signalling via marking/dropping and we want tha= t signal to reach the other end as quickly as possible, no? > >My thought was basically an optional filter that steered all pure acks >(no matter the classification) into the background queue=2E >Non-pure-acks (sacks) essentially jump the background queue and signal >that loss earlier=2E The backlog of other acks in background get >delivered out of order, but purely out of order and discarded by the >reciever=2E Mmmh, not sure whether all connections actually use SACK in the first plac= e? I am always a bit uneasy when networks try to be clever, if we think that = ACK rates are too high, IMHO we should teach the ACK emitters to slow down= =2E Sure, ACK filtering as in cake is a valuable tool if used judiciously i= n a home network (after all fixing the emitters is not going to happen over= night) but I would appreciate it much less if my ISP would by the same logi= c fuzz with my packets=2E (I grudgingly accept that GEO satellite ISPs migh= t have to do some fuzzing with RTTs so much outside of what normal TCPs are= prepared for, but I degress) Regards Sebastian > >> Regards >> Sebastian >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> >-- >> >I tried to build a better future, a few times: >> >https://wayforward=2Earchive=2Eorg/?site=3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww=2Eicei=2E= org >> > >> >Dave T=C3=A4ht CEO, TekLibre, LLC >> >_______________________________________________ >> >Cake mailing list >> >Cake@lists=2Ebufferbloat=2Enet >> >https://lists=2Ebufferbloat=2Enet/listinfo/cake >> >> -- >> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail=2E Please excuse my brevity= =2E > > > --=20 Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail=2E Please excuse my brevity=2E