From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.19]) (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 6684A3B29E for ; Wed, 22 Jan 2025 16:18:22 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmx.de; s=s31663417; t=1737580698; x=1738185498; i=moeller0@gmx.de; bh=+qF4BKp/7EG8NEahhXjllL0FixF5s3BpgaMR686pr9k=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From: In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id: References:To:cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from: message-id:mime-version:reply-to:subject:to; b=qkUWKAb2aRY7JmGir7wmaavPUU3ZVpKsBOz+TpcVYaDIdabbw4OlL1PFb9+4dYLy kd53ONSVtbgambe/RFVTj3y0UZCxrctWCcwkU1s6btsvKocrdXJu7ce5oYVt5kyP8 eOGCI6IMC8DItcFWZy9ub/COAA2qnYOwg1iFtrdKwBDFtyc9Ajl8wLZ7gvIOw100E qR9AJHdAn61Skg6CaM2VDyDFslMbLKq7iIBSYqiOnsSNtJGB59Sgs1xGlaN3XuBE9 UJhMWVr/jy6nF+plozoUgxSPaRSSAJOzf1CXkxneObMUOg8bLNEWyBkPHq4t5gOhc +DvQQLH0qOivk+9ZPQ== X-UI-Sender-Class: 724b4f7f-cbec-4199-ad4e-598c01a50d3a Received: from smtpclient.apple ([2.241.243.6]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx005 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MSbxD-1u2wNf2myn-00PGuz; Wed, 22 Jan 2025 22:18:18 +0100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3776.700.51.11.1\)) From: Sebastian Moeller In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2025 22:18:07 +0100 Cc: Jonathan Morton , cake@lists.bufferbloat.net, =?utf-8?Q?Toke_H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20250110155531.300303-1-toke@redhat.com> <2FE6B2E2-9A34-47C1-B203-F0C424F00704@gmx.de> <898E9FB0-D92E-4421-8CCD-1B9F4A3D9D5D@gmail.com> To: =?utf-8?Q?Dave_T=C3=A4ht?= X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3776.700.51.11.1) X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:i0QliRhBjx2Ql0WxQg1m7y/5D6oXb/z0s4/vBPya9YLi4tzdpKP PujafwKUeME1dAQiDArXEcICliakHpCga4pB1sn4Ei6nCpuzQXyDBUJBG9hj5RkNp3wY+CX S9uHTjmK5MXLPI/tpXtC83eZPbggEDOQstdobhl5Hb8QQMoDCGAJ1HRrviULjXOoAJGzXTb wEHK4P3b/kQ0SA2BpFBoA== X-Spam-Flag: NO UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:9z98Q/95Hz4=;5UPqFsBlIrFX2ytu9xyhou4LIvy EvjOOO3UNMBhcH8wXPbJLmSGy6pC8Q2uRrWg+/ZfOOUb6G09dA3m6sGD/V/dV2g+JsFoujuvZ IS0DU0k92hjZzEGr1yxQRbGL2tFUZL600gjYdWRPWPZ3TlK/pAd1MQx+TewIa2MBwB8JGc9IF EeXfQPJYqBW3beGAJTnqMuHhkQ2oFqcyNmmWJYQBRzTgLLn19eUusE615XC1t5lAnwwUN/kx1 nmKRF32IXnPpUO2nzt0tF4npGPP/OyYbEqxw8g1E/fO9TkqSEcFsS7n/c9FCrulenM90o3YWC 2fMMPmGMi8F8wnQUWyDlP1a/xkipHjzLNCD54PqBp0rq3B7YInBoFvme2zXJ3vGvsJTSQQy4M 423jBqBUAsZr41SxB45mn56pvtkoCJNlruVAf7h/Inoh1VVFUNupdTQZsW1oIxSYao+R8zPpd A0c+QQiz0/d3I8Fo2JxLilcEP0NR2haakuViHyznvPI+HJaUVs9Eadfjc7Ym4aYRD+AWzG/Zp PixyYImRbV6+CZ+JQU0lMMGrJaxwOqOErdg3LRO1OdN7kF/B55KLde21gnKFpEy1tsVwxYzYI Ku7/A3/FdyeuObxOszJaffVygTFgU62rdnMLMg4uxqz77xOGfk33Noc8mZcbuRgoPZ58wXIjn l44cn1bdyYZoysKVV9OwYBzGiNTlmoUguJyvTTo9Zze8y/p19I1px/NkuWxQ81Vl/YiL72+X2 3a296OJ5OqvIePl8EsPjEOK1xMgd0qpWAWHWJcB2M4/KJbUghXgjL+aIn6Y7TTro/1sSI62Fi sTEk5kOY7ZLFXFYCLQvSPlkK0lkRU46vNzWCO75PoHrcMShQxcBvTNskAKqVHXZAAPcqA5vr1 JzRbj8fmiQWkdtosTjUi6us46ZYNhvDAxF/PHGeSyO6okN07ZwDIMIJjJaSbp3OWbX1lOn44b THG7LrutmDJhjFf3otYNhF4nFCBR2+NDUv/IK7tZyJNLL2X+kdNy/CryS5QhNxWysJvdwg4mh d0yqSPJUyEUpRScMzbbPll4NiXlRG84vMlnhu0EkoCr2zlznf7Mj2qXVZqJZZBSIZR8wKznGA hyyYQi7ZGkwx572WG9mqzyv9mqB69K+oq87bdN+s98SYhQQIy0/2C9pCQD6EaakIuOq6AOpRE KKTAsPhCN+CAdm188zkqvK2ECLkGNVPWuVBK2PGDaew== Subject: Re: [Cake] [PATCH net-next] sched: sch_cake: Align QoS treatment to Windows and Zoom 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: Wed, 22 Jan 2025 21:18:22 -0000 Hi Dave, I seem to recall that cake's DSCP to priority tin mapping always was = intended to "do the right thing" by default and in that case that IMHO = means do something useful with the few DSCPs that applications actually = use in the wild (I might be somewhat wrong here in my impression, so = Jonathan, please correct me if I am wrong). I think that is a solid = guiding principle.=20 If enough zoom sessions over the internet actually use these DSCPs seems = fair to adjust cake's mapping to do something reasonable with them. I = have no clue about the actual numbers but I can see how moving video = from the tighter Voice tin to the wider Video tin makes sense I still am a bit puzzled about zoom's choice of 56 for audio, but I = guess I am just confused. Question, since zoom does not use CS4, why move that around? To avoid = CS4 having higher priority than CS5? Regards Sebastian P.S.: Has anybody tested whether this improves things enough in practice = to be noticeable? > On 22. Jan 2025, at 20:35, Dave Taht wrote: >=20 > This patch just moves CS4 and CS5 to the video tin. I hope that=C2=B4s = ok? >=20 > On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 12:34=E2=80=AFPM Sebastian Moeller = wrote: >>=20 >> Hi Dave, >>=20 >>> On 10. Jan 2025, at 20:43, Dave Taht wrote: >>>=20 >>> ok, I concede on NQB. Do we at least have agreement that CS5 belongs >>> in the VI queue, not the VO queue, on diffserv4? >>=20 >> As I said, I have less issues with bumping things down than up (but I = am also just voicing my opinion here, thanks for discussing, I am fine = ending up in the "rough" here). >>=20 >> About Zoom = (h++ps://support.zoom.com/hc/en/article?id=3Dzm_kb&sysparm_article=3DKB006= 6617): >> "The default Zoom DSCP marking values are 56 for audio, 40 for video, = and 40 for screen sharing. You can update audio and video values to = allow a network administrator to adjust the priority for Zoom traffic on = their network." >>=20 >> That 56 is CS7 for audio which I am pretty sure will not pass most of = the internet (I believe the IETF recommends to drop CS7 on ingress from = other ASs)... either they wanted to write 46 (EF) or they are just as = confused as the WiFi WMM folks... >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>>=20 >>> On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 9:43=E2=80=AFAM Jonathan Morton = wrote: >>>>=20 >>>>> On 10 Jan, 2025, at 7:07 pm, Dave Taht via Cake = wrote: >>>>>=20 >>>>> I do not think NQB belongs in Voice (which shares priority with >>>>> netcontrol, etc). I also do not think it belongs in best effort as = the >>>>> intent is to get a quick response to a short flow. yes, FQ solves = a >>>>> lot of problems, but >>>>=20 >>>> As far as I'm concerned, FQ implements everything that NQB wants. = In a system implementing FQ, treating NQB traffic as best-effort is the = Right Thing. >>>>=20 >>>> And I second the notion that slavishly copying wthe broken default = behaviour of WiFi routers is the Wrong Thing. >>>>=20 >>>> - Jonathan Morton >>>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> -- >>> Dave T=C3=A4ht CSO, LibreQos >>=20 >=20 >=20 > --=20 > Dave T=C3=A4ht CSO, LibreQos > <0001-sch_cake-Align-QoS-treatment-to-Windows-and-Zoom.patch>