From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lf0-x230.google.com (mail-lf0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::230]) (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 84B1A3B2A4 for ; Sat, 4 Mar 2017 13:45:53 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-lf0-x230.google.com with SMTP id y193so58723113lfd.3 for ; Sat, 04 Mar 2017 10:45:53 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=HKbmimxkI2CIgIhAtsLZpDwLF/A9BRSbHVML67WQQPo=; b=ps+eIRMPxCTHNqql2r+2WEOWVljruDd17YKZ2LT9v14+RSr48yCwxJfkMEiYG+wnZd XyzR4X/mmBgVO9pU5vLCemxynokZ94eAU4+n46JAKlZxwAGTheEqR+zHLDpFevczZ1Ac P1Og83HLNDrESkYJTy+wMlX5CWQfyec9x97vCH8rhxV0BY2Vydam8whUPx/yiyT8VllU oms6SEl6cuNorXmhoJ9nZIH83Ae0DOnKQMat0jKeZ7BW76LTabCsYNtBv9OSd0JCn4pZ F9jE+hNJicsoxEx0s1uy3frILAKQA6Img3AddObGLui2/S7UiLpKyEiSSrRQ5Wekb06E NK4A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=HKbmimxkI2CIgIhAtsLZpDwLF/A9BRSbHVML67WQQPo=; b=T2Ma/OEyNyS5xVQhflvaLn5WHhaluu300cv0bT10EvEO6S4K6YWftrSlf1gPjj7+ra MWD22wlEi7t9EehSWwowGCsDzr42F3koOxynULgPP4BfZqXI2axw9FQvJ7CP35o/7aCw 4ttui3qI+nF64Bt1ShbcTXNgq+wEth+cnS7jSmqNisLmSwlzCKK1FE21J7Yt8EL08NdX JaeCD6uEaG12l/ansP/JRMmYs2tlq9FI1aw95c+21+VBQG/j1sHEdQdQS2HD7ZKV73aW hNzUsVQ7IiF5QA3N9oH21ulqOq93xGxwbtDtDgmmSmKPBGZfgl16eKu/YwVrq+EqjSyQ XeQg== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39mlC01M2ibfJ9qMcisvtDv430DT2X/k+pccUEz///o0xgZyZHuocAsUxEL2BAYHEg== X-Received: by 10.25.33.208 with SMTP id h199mr2850045lfh.68.1488653152220; Sat, 04 Mar 2017 10:45:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.100.16] (37-219-206-78.nat.bb.dnainternet.fi. [37.219.206.78]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e88sm1328040lji.26.2017.03.04.10.45.50 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 04 Mar 2017 10:45:51 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) From: Jonathan Morton In-Reply-To: <752ad487-0826-ba92-6bbf-a46d031a10ee@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2017 20:45:42 +0200 Cc: Cake@lists.bufferbloat.net Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <752ad487-0826-ba92-6bbf-a46d031a10ee@gmail.com> To: Andy Furniss X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) Subject: Re: [Cake] low bandwidth default params best effort vs voice latency. 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: Sat, 04 Mar 2017 18:45:53 -0000 > On 4 Mar, 2017, at 20:21, Andy Furniss wrote: >=20 > So I mark icmp as ef which does go to voice and repeat the test. >=20 > It performs slightly worse for max delay. Hmm. If I=E2=80=99m reading those fping commands right, you=E2=80=99re = sending a total of 36KB/s in ICMP (4x 60pps 150B), which should fit into = the 25% Voice allocation on a 2Mbps (250KB/s) uplink. Under these = circumstances, Voice should still be prioritised relative to Best = Effort. Adding over 10ms of RTT is not what=E2=80=99s expected. Let me think carefully about how this filters through the priority = layer. I may need to tweak it a bit. - Jonathan Morton