From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <chromatix99@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-la0-x22d.google.com (mail-la0-x22d.google.com
	[IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::22d])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
	(Client CN "smtp.gmail.com",
	Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK))
	by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC02221F3E4;
	Thu, 16 Apr 2015 05:00:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by laat2 with SMTP id t2so54801777laa.1;
	Thu, 16 Apr 2015 05:00:26 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc
	:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to;
	bh=pbuB7QGofKMF/jzi8lx7ZFRBnx0nRS/NzCw1x/bqyqQ=;
	b=O/ept1JT8pKZaL2zoevMfZP5M55U3PdQAbu+qRuON3mVhwsn73Z/lYJ1nMqf0YBgsO
	di7vi8Jwu1EV2e6S/q/Nus5pHGYFIKfKoGRD9+odYsaPZFOA8c6puWvrPdWlAMupBRlj
	MZemHl8CZukVb0fbuzCQA6o/ona/5EISd7/foUVDwThR5GCWK+1VDPXg6JlmliWX7xZz
	LqRQC/xM9iiLWMiqS7k645x3DrQ1fjn723KyQhwhtmadO2WohXnDdODruNXZs6bmh8MO
	sIGirj3yiKaX9X9qqtSFXyYXn/ARXD4ycSHDeEMO9MJykWZ/m75V16nqpz5FAlDbQKK2
	wZcQ==
X-Received: by 10.152.36.2 with SMTP id m2mr27882185laj.72.1429185626600;
	Thu, 16 Apr 2015 05:00:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.43.25] (37-219-85-148.nat.bb.dnainternet.fi.
	[37.219.85.148])
	by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id g19sm1641191lbh.13.2015.04.16.05.00.24
	(version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
	Thu, 16 Apr 2015 05:00:25 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2098\))
From: Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <87twwg5m1u.fsf@toke.dk>
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2015 15:00:21 +0300
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <91CCD5F5-5F5D-435D-9FD1-77BBEEC1E84E@gmail.com>
References: <CAA93jw4ewK-ZEj0Fw14=Vwzk2xphiLZS4bdi95oJXLLPuRKPwg@mail.gmail.com>
	<AE067EE3-0B24-4DB9-82E8-074169BDD976@gmail.com>
	<87twwg5m1u.fsf@toke.dk>
To: =?utf-8?Q?Toke_H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= <toke@toke.dk>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2098)
Cc: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net, Rich Brown <richb.hanover@gmail.com>,
	"codel@lists.bufferbloat.net" <codel@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: [Cake] [Codel] hard limit codel
X-BeenThere: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13
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: Thu, 16 Apr 2015 12:00:58 -0000


> On 16 Apr, 2015, at 14:50, Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen =
<toke@toke.dk> wrote:
>=20
> I'll add, though, that I have seen the sentiment expressed here ("we
> need to limit the max delay of CoDel") in other contexts. And, well,
> delay spikes *is* a problem!

Yes, they are.

But in general AQM can=E2=80=99t be used to solve that problem without =
also suffering poor throughput; combining AQM with FQ *does* solve it.  =
Just like FQ is unfair to single flows competing against a swarm, but =
classifying the swarm traffic into a separate traffic class fixes that =
problem too.

Which of course is why cake uses AQM, FQ *and* Diffserv, all at once.

The linked paper didn=E2=80=99t measure HLC against fq_codel, even =
though they mention fq_codel.  That=E2=80=99s a major shortcoming.

 - Jonathan Morton