From: moeller0 <moeller0@gmx.de>
To: Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>
Cc: Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant <kevin@darbyshire-bryant.me.uk>,
cake@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: [Cake] triple flow isolation
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 16:48:01 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <A0226FC7-8277-443A-8C8F-97E008440CEF@gmx.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <452D0F47-931B-4412-AC59-C308388AA1E4@gmail.com>
HI Jonathan,
> On Jan 14, 2016, at 15:45 , Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> On 14 Jan, 2016, at 16:20, moeller0 <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
>>
>> I am really curious how cake behaves in that setting...
>
> I have identified a limitation in the current triple-isolation implementation - in fact it only works properly if the sources *and* destinations of the flows are independent. I’m working on a fix, so that it also works when *either* are different.
Ah, good to know, thanks. I am still curious about the non-NAT fairness by internal IP addresses only performance, as far as I understand that is the main request/use case people seem to have. We have been offering basically per-flow fairness for some time now (and that works mostly well), but it leaves people wishing for a tool to restrict the pain under-controlled bit-torrenting can have on all users of a given home network…
>
> Turns out that a brand-new, state-of-the-art algorithm has some subtleties to it. Who would have thought. :-)
;)
Best Regards
Sebastian
>
> - Jonathan Morton
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-14 15:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-11 17:40 Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant
2016-01-11 18:16 ` moeller0
2016-01-11 20:33 ` Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant
2016-01-14 14:20 ` moeller0
2016-01-14 14:45 ` Jonathan Morton
2016-01-14 15:48 ` moeller0 [this message]
2016-01-14 16:05 ` Jonathan Morton
[not found] ` <02A10F37-145C-4BF9-B428-BC1BDF700135@gmx.de>
2016-01-15 0:05 ` Jonathan Morton
2016-01-15 8:05 ` moeller0
2016-01-16 9:05 ` Jonathan Morton
2016-01-16 9:35 ` Jonathan Morton
2016-01-17 22:22 ` moeller0
2016-01-18 9:21 ` moeller0
2016-01-18 9:37 ` Jonathan Morton
2016-01-18 11:08 ` Alan Jenkins
2016-01-18 11:39 ` Jonathan Morton
2016-01-18 16:20 ` Sebastian Moeller
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=A0226FC7-8277-443A-8C8F-97E008440CEF@gmx.de \
--to=moeller0@gmx.de \
--cc=cake@lists.bufferbloat.net \
--cc=chromatix99@gmail.com \
--cc=kevin@darbyshire-bryant.me.uk \
/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