From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qk0-x236.google.com (mail-qk0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::236]) (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 E0D7E3B2A4 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 2017 15:03:13 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-qk0-x236.google.com with SMTP id j202so25786303qke.10 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 2017 12:03:13 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=SkQ/NJn9Z0XUx4f6/6JdAKtu8xBHLwQ3Fx/cpIPG9L0=; b=vJNckJpuAL6xq3TGa+uw+JHHtDM9eJfV6OhHjv6wWW+lxHzWyv6HhvJKPrk03Ip+tn 2QdeaQxfZYpOVO5D65eeiiAYdkfioe166IGe0KtaGvq8dF0YbhA+kFuNSNF/jUtMNVtt TkO+aLzj7r2QwTP6iw9Uw0yIivcJpk7swX/n9eEgPpP7IyZGGjvxjaeJE3JbQ1seI1qT We8czKz/ynJNLlMa9nhv5mls3xz8/GDdadSoOex3wCxXLTZBzpWUrIDiSXTq6b/ppW9+ DgFPt5TgN+C4sgTEt9pa3TjyCtGFm9WJq5K0eibWWf+wO8zhVjza4ByoVa5CEWZ39sZR PSEQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=SkQ/NJn9Z0XUx4f6/6JdAKtu8xBHLwQ3Fx/cpIPG9L0=; b=iu49kuUca7WH3PSn7+Yoox7TFbdk8FredW90gLPyWIAdDxY28ZZct43fD9tFFRPpko rtytYztD7J/WQTUNHNbOSyMu+ptOpHYaBS6tsBoitA/7oG9uBqZxwa9Chj5q8WW0hIPQ 4jgFZZhnKqyyEVB7Dkv/YSIF/K58r/i1pEejHdwfbZ6vM5EWTeTRzaZ+vSFSmDU2wiOo r1bsJk+WY1uQAzyE2eFCOonwoprofovT8tW+ergm5SazuVVGSdNngcE0DXxJFX3xsWXK 6Y2QE01QreXxiDw9dPpIaZFWy/dQm9rGxWumHBTCQQFv2yoOlRPEqI3E8ArIAMcHOp91 wJGQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX6m0FjrivaJtDKe1hoIP4VZ2p0OXNHPNRrxWoBzduAeduwKiZO4 qGedf/4KcPS2t5U0dkLW4mt3e/V7rdwAKneAVA0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMb1DR+/Q+kYx/u2AHhvctGTFJx1uWZ4KKxSGTwg2x0WMC2dJYvcyMnzEpeAJKiqx5oZ/yWJF2EnE0K3dPhuKSc= X-Received: by 10.55.188.6 with SMTP id m6mr8208322qkf.75.1511553793379; Fri, 24 Nov 2017 12:03:13 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.193.93 with HTTP; Fri, 24 Nov 2017 12:03:12 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <71FB183D-F848-4513-A6F6-D03FD0F10769@gmail.com> <52C2B216-220C-4C17-882C-9994867E86BB@gmail.com> <87tvxlvsex.fsf@nemesis.taht.net> <87609zapmt.fsf@toke.dk> <0D339F2F-F2CB-4800-84B9-E7321AE4D15E@gmail.com> From: Dave Taht Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2017 12:03:12 -0800 Message-ID: To: Pete Heist Cc: Dave Taht , Cake List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Cake] lan keyword affects host fairness 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, 24 Nov 2017 20:03:14 -0000 I support removing metro and below as keywords. Note: I am more interested in throughput (w/ecn) at the lower rtt settings than flow fairness (is the aqm scaling?). If we can have shorter queues overall while not taking a throughput hit, in the datacenter, that's a win. I have a hope, however, that at 10GigE we have sufficient queue size for both fairness and throughput, with even a 1ms rtt setting (50us target) but most of us lack the hardware that can test anything at those rates, and there are other problems in that Linux can't do more than about 4m PPS, so it is presently impossible, to my knowledge, to drive 10GigE to saturation with small packets using any qdisc. And there are many other overheads - notably qdisc locking and, fib lookup, in the way. It had been my hope that cake could be poured into ethernet hardware one day, but it has sprouted too many non O(1) things of late. On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 11:41 AM, Pete Heist wrote: > > On Nov 24, 2017, at 2:49 PM, Pete Heist wrote: > > Removing the bandwidth keywords altogether and going back to fq_codel=E2= =80=99s > specification of target and interval would be my personal preference (unl= ess > we can figure out how to make the keywords work well with one another in = all > cases). > > > To add to my comments, this probably came across as too harsh or > discontinuous an idea at this stage when we=E2=80=99re in the process of = shoring > things up- that wasn=E2=80=99t my intent! > > There is the other side that these keywords save people from having to kn= ow > more. Which is better, explaining target and interval to everyone or havi= ng > them use these? I imagine that was the logic that went into it. Also, if > it=E2=80=99s not a good idea to be changing the configuration interface a= t this > point (and it may not be), then there are alternatives, and the man page > addition will definitely help people. Maybe I=E2=80=99ll make some runs a= cross a > range of rtts to understand this better=E2=80=A6 > > > _______________________________________________ > Cake mailing list > Cake@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake > --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht CEO, TekLibre, LLC http://www.teklibre.com Tel: 1-669-226-2619