From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-io0-x22d.google.com (mail-io0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::22d]) (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 E5E863CB35 for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 14:11:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-io0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id f3-v6so3505903iob.13 for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 11:11:32 -0700 (PDT) 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; bh=ZCvdEZkilnKW73Y/f5yojTLfYzF37pEhnHMIF/uziOY=; b=aSokoxmqwEvXC/y7fh2hm9vRzuLP0keh+llpjV8HuWqb98EriFGw6I7Jn44Eq628bs R1xouxf4f6jdgekurDyLQUuV13xSdjvHmvU15LGJc2ZGmrn8jWOUzn1Y8e3+2eEB93rq mb2U3GBlgPZs96T1nhIG5r8J2BdScY5S7TBc9KOunvhxGVPFNbJrlaNv8ZuWp9GxbqYb 4/PP09Yk/qUAYLtdCXLJbQhAIxAom8nToGb/g9mzw7RaV+VWMgfP1rU+ywQnKrUmS6Ql cgaYMUoRl2QA0ZSkAMNr0LiRQ23/LvkxuzlZ8lge5UpgVx6SOH+O1wu/uNPrXjlrruXW Z+Pg== 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; bh=ZCvdEZkilnKW73Y/f5yojTLfYzF37pEhnHMIF/uziOY=; b=HTiHLIlSbbu4JmQPgn7e/tvqGKe3+WrAZA/XcXr3xmdGxPiUTxOTCiAkFe7Cpeo3uy G8ypYTYHit7exaomC0QC/7ydTFFD5nDIQgXcGl5NO2g0xbp05178mQ37zxsUGeHwxDB2 kuHMKH2WJiKAumMVdw5ILRzS4VzZHrzArNclOb8i3gjzYtPLCPAVjQexK5aPZguyj011 Q6FlqCLITiLaYkZOVU5JmuZh+Nrxf7Y/V7x1f0Wq8iOzMiC1WLzFzsepxv6VoIhbZnOM czy/ZLL8Q6cfGE/b2hCTTztT2zqMARpD++qAz7sUifz7zGZOxPekCsNLHnfJqQao2xo/ ONWQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALQs6tCoo6qOiO2c/e2sRDT65+1t196DWf+Wo34vaahL2ZvVIsh+ihSz mmfFXOkr0uXulbGapkSD8YTthp48BKBqorgJ86k= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AB8JxZqxPDMv+9t4ZZUjqj2a1nYjdn/1XXRbEleG+Jd4t7R9yEdBR+BCZ9LiH3m+aarou97ZjfiVq0T9rpZPrzUUyVo= X-Received: by 2002:a6b:520b:: with SMTP id g11-v6mr184579iob.31.1524075092267; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 11:11:32 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a02:6c85:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 11:11:31 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5BD20E12-2408-4393-8560-3FDA52D86DB3@gmail.com> References: <87vacq419h.fsf@toke.dk> <874lk9533l.fsf@toke.dk> <87604o3get.fsf@toke.dk> <578552B2-5127-451A-AFE8-93AE9BB07368@gmail.com> <87r2nc1taq.fsf@toke.dk> <0BB8B1FD-6A00-49D6-806E-794BD53A449F@gmx.de> <3457DD8E-0292-4802-BD1E-B37771DCADA2@gmail.com> <87fu3s1om2.fsf@toke.dk> <5BD20E12-2408-4393-8560-3FDA52D86DB3@gmail.com> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Jonas_M=C3=A5rtensson?= Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 20:11:31 +0200 Message-ID: To: Jonathan Morton Cc: =?UTF-8?B?VG9rZSBIw7hpbGFuZC1Kw7hyZ2Vuc2Vu?= , Cake List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000007c6b7d056a2362dd" Subject: Re: [Cake] A few puzzling Cake results 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: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 18:11:33 -0000 --0000000000007c6b7d056a2362dd Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 6:54 PM, Jonathan Morton wrote: > > On 18 Apr, 2018, at 7:11 pm, Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen > wrote: > > > > What you're saying here is that you basically don't believe there are > > any applications where a bulk TCP flow would also want low queueing > > latency? :) > > I'm saying that there's a tradeoff between intra-flow induced latency and > packet loss, and I've chosen 4 MTUs as the operating point. Jonathan, in the last commit you went from 1 MTU to 4 MTUs. Stupid question maybe but did you also test 2 and 3 MTUs? /Jonas --0000000000007c6b7d056a2362dd Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 6:54 PM, Jonathan Morton <= chromatix99@gmai= l.com> wrote:
> On 18 Apr, 2018, at 7:11 pm, Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen &l= t;toke@toke.dk> wrote:
>
> What you're saying here is that you basically don't believe th= ere are
> any applications where a bulk TCP flow would also want low queueing > latency? :)

I'm saying that there's a tradeoff between intra-flow induce= d latency and packet loss, and I've chosen 4 MTUs as the operating poin= t.

Jonathan, in the last commit you went fr= om 1 MTU to 4 MTUs. Stupid question maybe but did you also test 2 and 3 MTU= s?

/Jonas=C2=A0

--0000000000007c6b7d056a2362dd--