Cake - FQ_codel the next generation
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>
To: Andy Furniss <adf.lists@gmail.com>
Cc: Cake@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: [Cake] low bandwidth default params best effort vs voice latency.
Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2017 22:27:57 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <95D56BA5-0C5E-4D2E-B28F-A8C957B5F65D@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <752ad487-0826-ba92-6bbf-a46d031a10ee@gmail.com>

Okay, I think I’ve worked out what is happening.

At 250KB/s, it takes 6ms to get one 1500-byte bulk packet down the pipe.  This is unavoidable, so having a bulk flow competing with your game traffic will always increase your peak latency by that much.

With three independent game streams in play, it’s possible for them all to transmit simultaneously *and* to coincide with a bulk packet having just been sent.  With overheads, it will take a total of 8.5ms to get all four packets through.  This corresponds nicely to your best-effort results; you’re getting very close to the theoretical best performance there.

So Diffserv marking actually can’t improve your performance in this particular case.  But it shouldn’t make it worse either.  You’re actually seeing a nearly 6ms increase in peak latency, which corresponds neatly to an additional bulk packet ending up ahead of the game traffic in the queue.

That’s not supposed to happen, but I think I can see how it *can* happen with the current Diffserv logic.  It’s a weighted DRR, much like what is used between flow queues a little further down - but it *doesn’t* have a special bonus for sparse tins.  That’s something I clearly need to fix.

To help remind me, please do open an issue on the Github project.

 - Jonathan Morton


  parent reply	other threads:[~2017-03-04 20:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-03-04 18:21 Andy Furniss
2017-03-04 18:45 ` Jonathan Morton
2017-03-04 19:28   ` Andy Furniss
2017-03-04 20:27 ` Jonathan Morton [this message]
2017-03-04 23:05   ` Dave Taht
2017-03-05 12:43     ` Andy Furniss
2017-03-05 12:37   ` Andy Furniss

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: https://lists.bufferbloat.net/postorius/lists/cake.lists.bufferbloat.net/

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=95D56BA5-0C5E-4D2E-B28F-A8C957B5F65D@gmail.com \
    --to=chromatix99@gmail.com \
    --cc=Cake@lists.bufferbloat.net \
    --cc=adf.lists@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox