From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-io1-xd35.google.com (mail-io1-xd35.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d35]) (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 9D6C33B2A4 for ; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 12:24:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-io1-xd35.google.com with SMTP id t6so13429967ios.7 for ; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 09:24:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=myz3xyzuTsVJgrV6PJZpXhoZ7LoYnVZIL6ancwbsyMw=; b=a00R/qI8VL2sOE5wNHcbDwPRpTTBXfVe0nTKwKhrEhjyhpqMFJhzLi5HCOHA1O09sZ RIoAnfiEeYBXWx8hiDg1TGTxN4p221y37rhchzQXYkAro+TvK55f8vVZeF1KCHqMI+6t qH+6Hi4YllsvftjP/C4viLG/J3a2Z2MCf44rM4uUkl7Le91gbVMjaj3Fso6J/a6m+Utb IhkbH3a59p3EiyoECtRz2ZsUnP6OACmpU2TATsXzvoNTTfkRel7FygrFG733X5wQ0rnW sWGz39B70YkmHHO4/1QAwnZjIwhVEP5KOQPOKFFcCrjvW3gDZJ/WFKIa8koXLShC1Zwo UslQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=myz3xyzuTsVJgrV6PJZpXhoZ7LoYnVZIL6ancwbsyMw=; b=ZOZ/LTqLtwrn/V6EzMwrLUFFdGMioZn7d9NflrPjFVN0WxsadZx1KGEYG6zGLNbnsr ji2o/VHvLnzKwmi8YXkJ64nvq7r4cQlIy5o6Z0Ip2i8MdnhZjRCaN5LS5K92ycNpMi9p ulJG2c5xI1RAzBbV/37JvVNYk8UdK9CZfWaJgGAOEWUUkPGNXWvaOmUv6Z9oGZdmWKyM oDSBkQ8AZh1mjLeJ26OND7TRiO3W8oIeTtIaLfN2lyhPix9FK+4pzetTGVjO38ekrwdW amq9TOL3zQIxtxyyCg13cUXGCKh3l96mDnwEZTQUQqomdXyZRYFyuIKV8awk+rKyGSPJ ALEw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUrPxQvj23GdTCx3kNO+8zyeTt7mUv0TnFzI2ib/aStwB3l6pWg xLYUCfk5YajqQGLyFciHQqyTvyWUx2KE1nKANnl1MlUfvEg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxqexoFqPJjBBG7B+Sm27uFIrhafQLZ7ZJtLBKEkwpOWoiCrQ+e2RXsAmb/V4N+aE030/8EKSVZeGkXJjIMSiE= X-Received: by 2002:a02:cd82:: with SMTP id l2mr4531779jap.97.1566318277405; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 09:24:37 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Dave Taht Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 09:24:24 -0700 Message-ID: To: Sebastian Gottschall Cc: Cake List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Cake] cake in dd-wrt 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: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 16:24:40 -0000 On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 5:09 AM Sebastian Gottschall wrote: > > :-) i'm following this list and yes we are working on bringing cake in :-= ) Yea! thx for being on the list! > is there any question behind this link from your side? I just wanted to make people here aware that it was happening. Is there a build now? If I had any one principal request it would be to make sure the dd-wrt gui (if one is made) exposes the link layer parameters. Getting the framing wrong is about the biggest error I see in the deployment: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DLjJW_s5gQ9Y Other nifty cake features: "wash" and "besteffort" are important on some cablecos that remark traffic to CS1 "nat" is dang useful if you are natting ack-filter helps on really slow asymmetric networks on the slow side only. So, like, my defaults would be in: nat wash besteffort # triple-isolate bandwidth X etc out: nat ack-filter # if > 10x1 down/up ratio And make sure the link layer settings are exposed in the gui. I really don't know how much "washing" is needed outside the cablecos, taking packet captures of various isps to see how often dscp bits are mangled nowadays would be good. besteffort on inbound saves some on cpu. Are you using the out of tree version or mainline? Out of tree has some experimental SCE work that I'd love to see tested at more scale but not actually shipped at this = time. Due to how cpu intensive cake can be (on inbound) I've been working on a faster, less feature-full fq_codel, it's here: https://github.com/dtaht/fq_codel_fast I hate the idea of fq_codel one way, cake the other, but tbf + fq_codel_fast seems to work well at ~1gbit on my apu2 and cake doesn't. I'd originally planned to try and make a multi-core shaper out of it, but sce distracted me.... Having more folk on board benching stuff on modern non-x86 platforms would be good. Another cake feature is that you can get all the benefits on a normal ethernet (with bql) *without turning the shaper on* but we have not benchmarked that either vs a vs fq_codel or fq_codel_fast Have fun! Here's the first paper: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1804.07617.pdf > Sebastian > > Am 18.08.2019 um 18:33 schrieb Dave Taht: > > https://svn.dd-wrt.com/ticket/5796 > > --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht CTO, TekLibre, LLC http://www.teklibre.com Tel: 1-831-205-9740