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 4CAC93B2A4 for ; Wed, 28 Mar 2018 20:53:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-lf0-x230.google.com with SMTP id g203-v6so5997435lfg.11 for ; Wed, 28 Mar 2018 17:53:23 -0700 (PDT) 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=EjBgecCPIxBKLSChv+7iJQBhIoz2iieX7/xIwXWZB+g=; b=XnPV/IhgwJhYEVExe0yr/rKO5Z+pBUZnSB4l6ygaxkNp2OeRJ2AhZ2OFfViFRB85id a/sFGfNvjCsSVavNM3ShgXeifbtD7ofq8mecWAke7YQbTXzbMloiC9ZPKP+Y4KJdGON4 vbBMdyQE4ZBHlEPINWo5emHFlWiXAR7kJetr9fP5mpbmJWmi2fjogbP38lsxThfDkEdu 50SNTF3F1kirjV81XOUz+c5NVSIyux5Jzo5S2b9tdjQ5A3vPmpNc/Mi3CdxizCFwkn08 Es1VH2CZMptBqKPMA57YcAMLF6e4QW1AaFr7Z/I+x1wFsjEMkeC7vKlSmSSdVMqYLlVZ auIA== 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=EjBgecCPIxBKLSChv+7iJQBhIoz2iieX7/xIwXWZB+g=; b=TpZ7FmTpQHcjJOHp2pELM5MPx0NPGl9ChGCx6HR3YdKqRxtiqo4knH8hLFtnJCp86Q XGQCTVtlJMBa8vr0x8XEHlWXOAEHq6qlNSV4WSfQjEXiWkhe/5ypvrbyfx5mylXWvL2M /uq/nxx31lIq7hjkkRHnT627YGv41h29rs7hsNWHGrj7cFHNR+lOAWQ9IADp8tS33LMx Yc2hGwph6Jn7i9AwGfn0Vp9P3yGGVS+FnMX5PMqZKbVleZNbBa5dwZgU5pKjq/cm2sEA TdRSx9vt+vRAiWC1SHTYZtYBzSFOPCqpHVWZv1OOTCctyJa3Otk7z97foJjYe7rW4Yiz Wydg== X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7EcJfr3IAsenotaEtCAyXOqt6VbhPzhPHQ1mevlGPvwFAccTXY3 BIHk9tkteQzU63XfXE3xsH4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx48zY5uhNBFGGjhUomaOLI3YKL7o6ZeHi67aIejfdeuGH9fsy+pTF5JNjnUSF/HWkask42LyoA== X-Received: by 2002:a19:53cf:: with SMTP id h76-v6mr3693400lfl.87.1522284801656; Wed, 28 Mar 2018 17:53:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.239.216] (83-245-236-162-nat-p.elisa-mobile.fi. [83.245.236.162]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l66-v6sm887447lfe.74.2018.03.28.17.53.20 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 28 Mar 2018 17:53:20 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.2 \(3445.5.20\)) From: Jonathan Morton In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 03:53:18 +0300 Cc: =?utf-8?Q?Toke_H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= , Cake List Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <87k1twgpsy.fsf@toke.dk> <0FDFC78B-95A4-4A4E-8498-6C4AC9610BD0@gmail.com> To: Dave Taht X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.5.20) Subject: Re: [Cake] bufferbloat still misunderstood & ignored 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: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 00:53:23 -0000 > On 29 Mar, 2018, at 3:26 am, Dave Taht wrote: >=20 > A finicky bit would be who to penalize when the underlying medium > (shared cable) is oversubscribed. Two obvious reasonable solutions: share equally per subscriber, or share = proportionately to provisioned bandwidth per subscriber. Either should = be fairly straightforward to implement in an integrated qdisc, and = either would penalise the (instantaneously) heaviest users before = affecting normal or light users. Equal sharing has the interesting side-effect that subscribers on lower = tiers don't notice backhaul congestion at all until higher tiers have = been forced down to their level. This potentially gives ISPs an = incentive to avoid such extreme congestion (by upgrading backhaul to = match demand), since rational customers won't pay for bandwidth they = can't use. It also ensures that all subscribers retain a reasonable, = basic level of service during abnormal congestion events. Conversely, proportional sharing might give a perverse incentive, since = paying more gives a larger share of the pie, no matter how cramped it = is. Artificial scarcity could then be used to aid up-selling in an = anti-consumer manner, similar to what's been seen with Netflix. It = would be naive to assume that ISPs won't do this, given the opportunity, = so it would be better to build only the more consumer-friendly option = into the software. Theoretically, a middle ground could be to assign a sharing weight = separately from the provisioned bandwidth. This would permit, for = example, subscribers provisioned at 100:1 bandwidths to receive 4:1 = service under congested conditions. However, this would be under ISPs' = control and fully documented, and would therefore be a little too = tempting to abuse. - Jonathan Morton