From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qt1-x829.google.com (mail-qt1-x829.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::829]) (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 2E7C43B29E; Sun, 3 Feb 2019 19:18:30 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-qt1-x829.google.com with SMTP id b15so1949861qto.8; Sun, 03 Feb 2019 16:18:30 -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=epQb0CLk3++q562aVkCZ+7e++/zgkoySI6O+Nd/7mmM=; b=eeVt1xcyqfyVqHFhZc6BquYsQblStYWj9aAwLBOkJIzBFxbns1HRNkI+sCyUiVPith Bqtcbfw8ELHfDhNybdrO25VSl75TObZ3tzrCgZzPZ82yBeW5GVSeEunbZTnmxXOEKtxe 96ljVvJIvXGFsesB03Zx7x/cMpyFgwp5BGo0BxjiTHaZHSDiC+RAfEaZwO755RK5BdZw gRqzkVJL81E70Xf1xUhdTpT3dnvPjsEhN/7UGv6dc6Fze0S66007V93SFDjVS8ax6yPw X6HdU7mHYtuvQ6odrLc8MhbbFCKa6E00qfQrBNyXbuvHHbTEaenJ2C74XUwbPpY5pYos xsjg== 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=epQb0CLk3++q562aVkCZ+7e++/zgkoySI6O+Nd/7mmM=; b=R4yNGKxw+2Rp26Wgsn1c7n/CFKRcbCHverPGBc/wmzLAqfljBGtOkhAMFYW+CLVkzy Zp/vCamkQFvFazf4Y3VrAWpaMNHwkocIV9vyfhjJ7Xr492S9ayAHqGeMCpTdAw3UoKrU ++z+cVeTaWM3cE4yWYZ/ek7Kxh1wQ/zF2rXHhRlKt23GEa1xgLHpomzHf1mFIWeVNPpd u0Vc9Nvzcuoao++i91PL8KuXO+mTWEtDhWY9u5yED+1J8JiNdz8VYckY4/hUictkj2b2 Sa0OmurahRuNkT8usNM1s85PzPr3/ATwzpMH/zJHs77cPLQCBjNuvlMRP3p8i2ynv4Z/ OnCQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AJcUukczAbaKNpehu/uOD9I/bkmE2ETmL1NVw8Z9akpzhyrHUrvikDDl xx+5Ix28DuSk8N1dd3bXWTTo9icjGDVBW2ImsruuNyUa X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN4ii+XPypqXsvPvg0v6evMAQIHs3aBvoDF8nYkZLEWecGaG69aNrimYiLTRJCJ+MTSF4nr43xlCBpKp4XxCj6k= X-Received: by 2002:a0c:afd1:: with SMTP id t17mr45395067qvc.93.1549239509578; Sun, 03 Feb 2019 16:18:29 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1549233729.17269312@apps.rackspace.com> In-Reply-To: <1549233729.17269312@apps.rackspace.com> From: Dave Taht Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 16:17:48 -0800 Message-ID: To: "David P. Reed" Cc: cerowrt-devel , Cake List 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 00:18:30 -0000 On Sun, Feb 3, 2019 at 2:42 PM David P. Reed wrote: > > Well, you all know that I think of diffserv as an abortion. It's based on= thinking that assumes central, hierachical adminstrative agreements among = what should be autonomous systems. I too think diffserv is terrible. On the other hand, I do think there is room for 4 levels of priority in a network - priority (for packets like link layer control and urgent network/maint packets), best effort, background, and - as this specifies - least effort. Cake, I think, makes the best possible tradeoffs by layering the diffserv spec into 3 or 4 priorities by default, and optimizing for "sparse" flows always. Even without diffserv it accomplishes what's needed. It would have been nice to have more bits for ECN and less for diffserv. > Yeah, at layer 2 for packets that stay within an administratively uniform= domain, diffserv can be useful. The problem with repurposing CS1 for "background" is that many networks to this day give CS1 more priority than CS0. So the new LE codepoint - so long as it is not treated as "starve this" e2e - seems useful. > > But even "Paris Metro" scheduling (2 classes, priced dynamically) is high= ly unstable. If you would like to evaluate these https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tsvwg-aqm-dualq-coupled/ https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id/ it would help. Earlier this month I plowed through the current state of this and decided that it was perhaps, time, to pursue the "some congestion experienced" and ELR proposals jonathan had for the ECN bits. > And the nature of networks is that they MUST operate almost all the time = well below their capacity. (This is true of packet nets, railroads, highway= s, ...). It's called the "Mother's Day problem". When Mother's Day happens,= you should have enough capacity to absorb vast demand. Therefore what you = do all the other days doesn't matter. And on Mother's Day, if you have cong= estion, there's no way in hell that anybody is happy. > > This fairy story about traffic giving way to higher priority traffic bein= g a normal mode of operation is just that. A made up story, largely used by= folks who want to do selective pricing based on what customers are willing= to pay, not on value received. (that's a business story, thouhg - like the= Xerox machines that were supposed to charge more for billion dollar real e= state contract copies and less for notices to put up near coffee machines -= Xerox wanted a share of the real-estate business cash flow). That's a great background story. Got a source? > Which doesn't mean that there might not be better ways to do large scale = traffic engineering balancing of flows - but that's not an end-to-end probl= em. It's a network management problem that involves changing routing tables= . > > -----Original Message----- > From: "Dave Taht" > Sent: Sunday, February 3, 2019 1:39pm > To: "cerowrt-devel" , "Cake List" > Subject: [Cerowrt-devel] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-le-= phb-06 is in last call > > And seems likely to be adopted. > > There seems to be an urge to make this codepoint starvable, which > since I ascribe to nagle's dictum "every application has a right to > one packet in the network" - doesn't work for me - but the draft is > vaguely worded enough to just start dumping this codepoint into the > background queue of both sqm and cake and worry about it in a decade > or three. > > it's 000001 which I guess is: > > diff --git a/sch_cake.c b/sch_cake.c > index 3a26db0..67263b3 100644 > --- a/sch_cake.c > +++ b/sch_cake.c > @@ -343,7 +343,7 @@ static const u8 diffserv4[] =3D { > }; > > static const u8 diffserv3[] =3D { > - 0, 0, 0, 0, 2, 0, 0, 0, > + 0, 1, 0, 0, 2, 0, 0, 0, > 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, > 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, > 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, > > (or is that reversed? my big endian/little endian chops scuks, and > nobody modified the gen_cake_const tool to match what cake expects > now) > > on my off days I kind of wish the diffserv lookup we do in cake had > managed to make it into the linux mqprio/prio stuff by default. > > -- > > Dave T=C3=A4ht > CTO, TekLibre, LLC > http://www.teklibre.com > Tel: 1-831-205-9740 > _______________________________________________ > 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