From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-oi0-x22f.google.com (mail-oi0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22f]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9F59C21F2A1 for ; Mon, 13 Apr 2015 08:30:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: by oiko83 with SMTP id o83so7187856oik.1 for ; Mon, 13 Apr 2015 08:30:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=wYEorf/ZG0aeIRH9C4XeAHDwRU/gtHl0QFQcNFuTuNw=; b=TPs6QX/Qmz39gVL02C35THFLejD4rxupBo0Itg5L76ux7ZF5UMpISL8NiXz9yyEBOK tqpQ4w4jTyrhI05o3xQy2ATaqLqdvVQgrbgdA+TKK+6a986Ur/j5kEuD9K4fywxtOXTh n1paCKLSZaqPG89XG+z+mq3Afl4TLkO7jpVrPA4CWeBx+GsgEvAFD7WUFwFwXLndORMP uGWuwvCoUPEGyj7NIhy8plWpe4+pAibr0xqG7DbjiGkt0IBbVxRSUdtq6IE/TD7NclOJ qcFyDveKKVlAcr/4EbcKn2HX2CZ6ls4ZS3iD2OB+FRdOVLN6b9xLYOHxUhYoE9pi//fM P8Pw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.103.234 with SMTP id fz10mr12477650oeb.11.1428939020327; Mon, 13 Apr 2015 08:30:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.202.51.66 with HTTP; Mon, 13 Apr 2015 08:30:20 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 08:30:20 -0700 Message-ID: From: Dave Taht To: Jonathan Morton Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net Subject: Re: [Cake] squash option X-BeenThere: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 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, 13 Apr 2015 15:30:49 -0000 On Sun, Apr 12, 2015 at 5:01 PM, Jonathan Morton wr= ote: > >> On 13 Apr, 2015, at 01:20, Dave Taht wrote: >> >> Inbound diffserv markings cannot be trusted. A simple remark to >> dscp & ECT(3) of diffserv is kind of a must for cake. > > As I noted previously, cake can trivially be configured to ignore Diffser= v. A simple iptables rule would then suffice to remove the mark for downst= ream consumers if desired. We need the simplicity of an rfc-compliant squash option in cake. FQ is far more important than diffserv or aqm in sorting things properly for most people. As noted elsewhere, what we see are packets marked CS1 entering the system (treated as priority by most ethernet devices) and then treated as background on wifi devices. > More useful would be the ability to re-mark packets according to local Di= ffserv policy before cake=E2=80=99s classifier acts on it. Iptables doesn= =E2=80=99t help here, because it runs *after* ingress qdiscs (even in ifb).= Unfortunately, the likely complexity of the configuration mechanism for s= uch a device runs counter to cake=E2=80=99s deliberately simple configurati= on interface. I concur that remarking is too complex for cake. But squashing is not. The ip header is hot in cache at the time at which it could occur, also. > However, I have no objection to a second qdisc which could be run in seri= es with cake to perform that function. This would be a qdisc which perform= s no queueing of its own, and simply performs the re-marking before passing= the packet up the qdisc stack. The configuration mechanism of this can be= relatively complex, but narrowly focused on the re-marking task. Call it = =E2=80=9Cicing=E2=80=9D or =E2=80=9Ccherry=E2=80=9D or whatever, to emphasi= se that it goes on top of cake. > > - Jonathan Morton > --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht Open Networking needs **Open Source Hardware** https://plus.google.com/u/0/+EricRaymond/posts/JqxCe2pFr67