From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qt1-x834.google.com (mail-qt1-x834.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::834]) (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 4587E3B29E; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 05:24:33 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-qt1-x834.google.com with SMTP id n32so14704603qte.11; Mon, 04 Feb 2019 02:24:33 -0800 (PST) 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=5SCwe864OSruzTybDmygCpUYwlxxx+hScj4rImpZWOY=; b=PLE0pJSWTgsEXWHZp6AuWkjOHo6I3EIxJI2e1sF21kIBxJgdlKuVHbv1hHmXnnAEY4 smdcnQkEQqhMEK32ooaQVxM4EsrLLq7laqXjghxWGS1CgBDzpW6kpeyHMQOORbE9Ot7H 0kUVgTO451LdFhh8qm2JBVweOkMadbgrM73ZPuaxipfcZ5Fti9HIC6dyYXHOn7j+BGYp Un3+QhHnEa2T4D6/6GRriBvdSSqtPxvH9zLPrXzYSGw68wrb8gMtKJN1s40yM1iB5RJb ANkgIrdQ8a692nxtXdtIuClPp6VgpX2DWjpZDevvLbu5WhahbVI6l+g3ZKHCpg9nXFgA TlAw== 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=5SCwe864OSruzTybDmygCpUYwlxxx+hScj4rImpZWOY=; b=uk0OUYtRnrZ7D734Br3C1yH80v707ZJqYHqjNsB0LDMcq8+DQne59nmf6DaTejv5Oj FkXeyKPfpUwygnGXEh+V3FPnwSacVDvvinwHnnkFdR+syTu6bxncCaO6wvL8ouSyUsdC 2EUFk1wKl3HPa8eq7p6OrDS0ebd6tFFvenqVZXay7dYyfYwP2uj9fmX9jBjb6T3b3KDX GetiNCn/3xJGByYX8vH/yQBQi/1a4aJEAQbdyGnJUErwF9xSER5mNapoLp4fYiESk/OH DAUpxs9G9RcZ3ouCN0C3RDsJEP2zu/MQNrDaLq3mM/PG/Q9W/wg135VnszmbqsEYePwz qSTg== X-Gm-Message-State: AJcUukcmM1IQG3sMmw2bpvjK0zYdl5rGpNfng14XVzEMWk4oRlsQu2PH cAXs5tlIAfJWAwI6DEmS6GqBvwG8JQvoQmScSE4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN5PQpuReu3aGMSOTimOGEltFKQ82R+WspCaqAdMe5wN4R/5gV0HzCmESi+aCJS925IAp8vlw7enp7lV4qzlZOw= X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5314:: with SMTP id t20mr48354586qtn.328.1549275872702; Mon, 04 Feb 2019 02:24:32 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1549233729.17269312@apps.rackspace.com> <87k1ig6nwd.fsf@taht.net> In-Reply-To: From: Dave Taht Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 02:23:53 -0800 Message-ID: To: Mikael Abrahamsson Cc: Dave Taht , Cake List , cerowrt-devel Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Cake] [Cerowrt-devel] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-le-phb-06 is in last call 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: Mon, 04 Feb 2019 10:24:33 -0000 On Sun, Feb 3, 2019 at 11:11 PM Mikael Abrahamsson wrote= : > > On Sun, 3 Feb 2019, Dave Taht wrote: > > > Well, (I just checked, let me know if you want the captures) comcast > > still re-marks all codepoints it does not recognize, to become CS1, > > including this one. So the smartest thing a comcast customer can do is > > wash it out on entrance to their domain. > > If I didn't think we ever could change things, I wouldn't support > documents like these. I support this document. I note sqm and cake are the *only* QOS systems out there that have ever bothered to pay attention to the diffserv standards. I don't think netduma's "anti-bufferbloat" does, nor does the mq, prio, etc qdiscs in linux. > > The idea is to go to the ISP community and say "Please treat LE as BE in > your core/peering links, and only act on it on the customer access shaper > (optional). Please don't bleach it." It's not a please. It's a three way contract with network services, isps, and users. And of these, the users request should be paramount. short of a lawsuit I don't see any way comcast can be coerced to remove the *one* line in their cmts config files that remarks traffic. ... but hey, miracles happen. passing CS1 through to wifi really sucks. Bleaching all diffserv from comcast at the edge makes sense until that miracle happens. > > 000001 has never been in use before, so the hope is that people will allo= w > this to happen. CS1 has had different meanings over time so it's harder t= o > handle. I agree. CS1 has caused no end of trouble for a good idea. > The problem with CAKE/FQ and background traffic is that it can't tell if > there is congestion or not, and things like LEDBAT can't backoff and try > to avoid causing congestion. So your previous email about allowing some > congestion to take place on LE would be good as then protocols that try t= o > avoid causing congestion would have a way to do so. I do not like that the standard allows for total starvation. I would prefer it had a minimum of 5%. > > -- > Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se > _______________________________________________ > Cerowrt-devel mailing list > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht CTO, TekLibre, LLC http://www.teklibre.com Tel: 1-831-205-9740