From: Georgios Amanakis <gamanakis@gmail.com>
To: Pete Heist <pete@heistp.net>
Cc: "Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@toke.dk>,
"Cake List" <cake@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: [Cake] Upstream submission of dual-mode fairness patch
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2019 09:40:58 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CACvFP_jUQgosvTARfH8Rrwh-q65tiEwcHeoR1U+hHZw486r_vQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <D5CE6CDD-36F7-4CA9-86DE-CC1BA3799379@heistp.net>
Thanks for testing Pete! The unfairness you see occurs if you shape
ingress using ifb on the same interface you shape egress, right?
Sounds puzzling to me, and I don't have an explanation right now.
On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 6:55 AM Pete Heist <pete@heistp.net> wrote:
>
>
> On Mar 1, 2019, at 12:01 PM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@toke.dk> wrote:
>
> Pete Heist <pete@heistp.net> writes:
>
> That said, unless there’s an obvious reason for this that’s fixable,
> I’m fine with how it is, considering the improvement. :)
>
>
> Cool! And you haven't seen any regressions in other usage? :)
>
>
> To be honest, today’s the first time I tried it and I haven’t done any testing on it beyond fairness. (So, ship it!)
>
> At least, I haven’t seen any other problems in this one-armed routing scenario or a regular host to host scenario.
>
> Host fairness seems “mostly good" no matter what values I choose for the number of flows of the four clients, flow fairness still looks good, and I don’t see any problems starting and stopping different numbers of flows mid-test.
>
> Pete
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cake mailing list
> Cake@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-03-01 14:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <mailman.1788.1551352661.3538.cake@lists.bufferbloat.net>
2019-03-01 10:52 ` Pete Heist
2019-03-01 11:01 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2019-03-01 11:55 ` Pete Heist
2019-03-01 14:40 ` Georgios Amanakis [this message]
2019-03-01 16:43 ` Pete Heist
2019-03-02 3:02 ` George Amanakis
2019-03-02 4:47 ` George Amanakis
2019-03-02 10:20 ` Pete Heist
2019-03-03 7:19 ` Pete Heist
2019-03-03 9:53 ` Sebastian Moeller
2019-03-03 9:58 ` Jonathan Morton
2019-03-03 11:26 ` Sebastian Moeller
2019-03-03 12:13 ` Jonathan Morton
2019-03-03 12:53 ` Sebastian Moeller
2019-03-03 16:07 ` Pete Heist
2019-03-03 16:10 ` Jonathan Morton
2019-03-03 16:35 ` Pete Heist
2019-03-03 16:40 ` Jonathan Morton
2019-03-03 18:48 ` Pete Heist
2019-03-03 19:03 ` gamanakis
2019-03-03 19:49 ` Pete Heist
2019-03-04 2:55 ` Georgios Amanakis
2019-03-04 3:17 ` Jonathan Morton
2019-03-04 4:22 ` Ryan Mounce
2019-03-04 8:27 ` Pete Heist
2019-03-04 13:17 ` Pete Heist
2019-03-04 14:36 ` Georgios Amanakis
2019-03-03 12:06 ` Pete Heist
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://lists.bufferbloat.net/postorius/lists/cake.lists.bufferbloat.net/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CACvFP_jUQgosvTARfH8Rrwh-q65tiEwcHeoR1U+hHZw486r_vQ@mail.gmail.com \
--to=gamanakis@gmail.com \
--cc=cake@lists.bufferbloat.net \
--cc=pete@heistp.net \
--cc=toke@toke.dk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox