From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-yk0-x22f.google.com (mail-yk0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c07::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 82E1721FE8A for ; Wed, 9 Sep 2015 16:54:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by ykdg206 with SMTP id g206so40407359ykd.1 for ; Wed, 09 Sep 2015 16:54:43 -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; bh=8r7aeb+vGRg5xtw7SXmdRb+6DPCed5x/S4+w3G83Xh4=; b=Sbh5E8tTuLHZTej1261jpcESm21+ILw3FhTWSSUEr6GO2QukLqTxcTsj4ejHYvxIGH N+hnwVv87zuaH3RQGLSHbu96UfQ0LDmUooHb38fdUxCyytmo7jjPjbxx7ZFoo36ZgZm+ pXyoWAAbv0pRm61nWLtLpfoNly0p3oCJ0BQ38psvUJGsnEp8AdcLXa8JopmUYm9w9+Sm AED1oROtX9fRZDhmJFrS8Il0DabOR9kG0m59Wnt7Bqaz6FVuQdDT351yABpcoD/qDq13 i2BQx3ktTOLAs7EsJ7mnUpUjKC31T931xPgox9/BoTgPyH9l6hrcr1rKQhHr6L1jxbre Hvug== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.129.53.194 with SMTP id c185mr35121545ywa.158.1441842883189; Wed, 09 Sep 2015 16:54:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.13.236.80 with HTTP; Wed, 9 Sep 2015 16:54:43 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2015 18:54:43 -0500 Message-ID: From: Benjamin Cronce To: Sebastian Moeller Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11421478dfe92a051f59342b Cc: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net, Felix Fietkau Subject: Re: [Cake] cake work needed for openwrt merge 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: Wed, 09 Sep 2015 23:55:06 -0000 --001a11421478dfe92a051f59342b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 2:20 AM, Sebastian Moeller wrote: > Hi Benjamin, > > > On Sep 8, 2015, at 00:31 , Benjamin Cronce wrote: > > [...] > > It may be easier to use a distance based naming. Instead of something > like "High(250ms) RTT" be like "Inter-continental", medium(100ms) RTT may > be "Intra-continental", and low(50ms) RTTs may be "Local Region". "Region" > can be a bit ambiguous, but I figured if given two options "Local Region" > and "Intra-continental", that the idea of what "region" represents in this > context is clear enough. Satellite links would only need one option because > the latency of the satellite will be greater than the latency from all of > the terrestrial links combined. As for the actual variable name and not the > option names. hmmm. Assuming similarly named options, "Optimize for"? > > [...] > > For the crowd on this mailing list any names will do, but for novices that > just heard of buffer bloat and its remedies, I believe we need simple > unambiguous names. The challenge with distance is that while geographical > distance should not be too hard to figure out, path distance is much > trickier (aka true user will need i measure). If I recall correctly, codel > is actually pretty robust against deviations of true RTTs from interval, > but I do not remember any data showing this on a per true RTT basis or for > fq_codel (where I assume the issue might be more pronounced, as the > different RTT flows will be separated unlike in codel where all is mixed). > > > Best Regards > Sebastian You point out that the path distance is more important than geological distance, which I find interesting because in my case, my max ping to any fiber linked place on Earth is almost exactly 250ms. Assuming 0.6c for light in fiber, that's 27,900 miles round trip. The Earth has a maximum circumference of 24,901 miles. That means route distance is within 12.5% of geological distance. I find latency to be a very good indication of geological distance. You did mention that you found my latencies "interesting". I have a feeling I have a special circumstance. Watch people narrow down where I live based on those listed latencies. At least I did some mild rounding. --001a11421478dfe92a051f59342b Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 2:20 AM, Sebastian Moeller <= ;moeller0@gmx.de&g= t; wrote:
Hi Benjamin,


On Sep 8, 2015, at 00:31 , Benjamin Cronce <bcronce@gmail.com> wrote:
> [...]
> It may be easier to use a distance based naming. Inst= ead of something like "High(250ms) RTT" be like "Inter-conti= nental", medium(100ms) RTT may be "Intra-continental", and l= ow(50ms) RTTs may be "Local Region". "Region" can be a = bit ambiguous, but I figured if given two options "Local Region" = and "Intra-continental", that the idea of what "region"= represents in this context is clear enough. Satellite links would only nee= d one option because the latency of the satellite will be greater than the = latency from all of the terrestrial links combined. As for the actual varia= ble name and not the option names. hmmm. Assuming similarly named options, = "Optimize for"?
> [...]

For the crowd on this mailing list any names will do, but for novices that = just heard of buffer bloat and its remedies, I believe we need simple unamb= iguous names. The challenge with distance is that while geographical distan= ce should not be too hard to figure out, path distance is much trickier (ak= a true user will need i measure). If I recall correctly, codel is actually = pretty robust against deviations of true RTTs from interval, but I do not r= emember any data showing this on a per true RTT basis or for fq_codel (wher= e I assume the issue might be more pronounced, as the different RTT flows w= ill be separated unlike in codel where all is mixed).


Best Regards
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Sebast= ian

You point out that the pa= th distance is more important than geological distance, which I find intere= sting because in my case, my max ping to any fiber linked place on Earth is= almost exactly 250ms. Assuming 0.6c for light in fiber, that's=C2=A027= ,900 miles round trip. The Earth has a maximum circumference of=C2=A024,901= miles. That means route distance is within 12.5% of geological distance. I= find latency to be a very good indication of geological distance. You did = mention that you found my latencies "interesting". I have a feeli= ng I have a special circumstance.

Watch people nar= row down where I live based on those listed latencies. At least I did some = mild rounding.

--001a11421478dfe92a051f59342b--