From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lj1-x22c.google.com (mail-lj1-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::22c]) (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 7B0E53B2A4 for ; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 10:14:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-lj1-x22c.google.com with SMTP id z26so2064325ljz.11 for ; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 07:14:54 -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=SENOVtCyxRS0z5psVbUTg+n3p6i+iZw2nzISHOZJLuc=; b=e3qTAMh/SeAJSETTKaOO/+X7z8CqmyWSU1eG0XnzGRYUG9wwVz0xI86HBEMMGI4yR2 yD6VKDVieuW1AsBAP4oFpqnp7QG3eB5IEuSu+Af11OPxd1kasI1sTHH0IDy2CAHhfb2V aZmukywW3M2GeK7jM/s45e0U4uJjp70/yU0wyF9EF0MnVkUQHxgJdpCBTd7BEu4W03lf 7/bSmvXVCpytZSnYgL9hcEpqwdN3RBTVZeiK07dYZ+oTxL+0ybBrjuRDwBUrYkOt7tkB K87vY0ZDRcW9vMo2riRqkVuZRdjxiFCfZhxXmZ/P8xyMDfhsHrsFwErI8MdWKo2XkYN7 /HMQ== 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=SENOVtCyxRS0z5psVbUTg+n3p6i+iZw2nzISHOZJLuc=; b=AACrEU0NmBFj/bLlkrWjVq871s5BfKi20Ypgy4Nk+IycFth3FXV/oaFJNifSSo+WR2 Im0RS4jt1j+8T6eSLrGHkZzQ3MHf6go3lceREhzByo3g4SmcETf0/e9sEYxnBQn1zrER au2jhpSpSNqm+pQ/TB5QFsobRlBFJ8VZ8b2E/sIOUhQPJhNv/jCBh56FOr8KxEqmzq3f QHnesWRpGI7ILFWdQngLHmvxaACF+3P+TapDWvwKzV4ea5dJtovd9SflfnsX5tReas8b GfgBblMG+Cqff4hpuBJ1sgNgxQxk282CakTIKWYOPBJ/Mm07ByVMQNb3eWLBG4z2b1Up erZw== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuZjJRY9PKiOog1ePM32OwCOVYD8rDV6ukeaTuAhY7YpJMXDcrBl krPRrLeOUhUgkV72zKOC8/A= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypLGqe58p5TQv0O6kI4kgkDCk8htqNpOo/UXj8xPwruldskv1RUaklbbYXwjLQOu43u636M2Jw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:651c:203:: with SMTP id y3mr3059942ljn.249.1586528093358; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 07:14:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jonathartonsmbp.lan (83-245-250-250-nat-p.elisa-mobile.fi. [83.245.250.250]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k18sm1811720lfg.81.2020.04.10.07.14.52 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 10 Apr 2020 07:14:52 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) From: Jonathan Morton In-Reply-To: <7BD9FB5D-7577-477A-9FF0-7BF90043C27B@darbyshire-bryant.me.uk> Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2020 17:14:51 +0300 Cc: Cake List Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <7BD9FB5D-7577-477A-9FF0-7BF90043C27B@darbyshire-bryant.me.uk> To: Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) Subject: Re: [Cake] Thinking about ingress shaping & cake 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: Fri, 10 Apr 2020 14:14:54 -0000 > On 10 Apr, 2020, at 4:16 pm, Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant = wrote: >=20 > I have a 80/20mbit FTTC line into the house. Egress shaping/control = with cake is simple, easy, beautiful and it works. Tell it to use = 19900Kbit, set some min packet size, a bit of overhead and off you go. = Ingress has more problems: >=20 > Assuming I do actually get 80Mbit incoming then the naive bandwidth = setting for CAKE would be 80Mbit. Cake internally dequeues at that = 80Mbit rate and therefore the only way any flows can accumulate backlog = is when they=E2=80=99re competing with each other in terms of = fairness(Tin/Host) and quantums become involved=E2=80=A6I think. No. If the dequeue rate is never less than the enqueue rate, then the = backlog remains at zero pretty much all the time. There are some = short-term effects which can result in transient queuing of a small = number of packets, but these will all drain out promptly. For Cake to actually gain control of the bottleneck queue, it needs to = *become* the bottleneck - which, when downstream of the nominal = bottleneck, can only be achieved by shaping to a slower rate. I would = try 79Mbit for your case. - Jonathan Morton