From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.18]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mout.gmx.net", Issuer "TeleSec ServerPass DE-1" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 58ADD21F37D for ; Wed, 26 Aug 2015 07:52:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from u-089-d066.biologie.uni-tuebingen.de ([134.2.89.66]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx002) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LaG7C-1Z1N6s1oKM-00lz54 for ; Wed, 26 Aug 2015 16:52:16 +0200 From: Sebastian Moeller Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 16:52:14 +0200 To: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:qzCDzuDIHPUsAf1TAxSn/B/nMSCGfz1OY31n8H952E3payC6Yoo 81V3RxbnTqi/CSR03dQ2J4Y1mkKLid2rZ4WFb1v8b84ttHwb+hluN1FHU9ES0qZlA1U72/p fwKZf5TVNeT3hjWaSwnxibL0YAUrGJ6TJyXMkeanmG5DXwqXXczV0CIgHS4TlE3gtUj7KMx YTjnWOnWzvdg1y5/4uiZg== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:rQP1t4MW/Qo=:feRU3fznEDycGG+RCLy5EU rfcgQ9jpwYVrpKhz1Nns7se56FSjYZng+hEuHUs1RFqXzdWvKQRdOCqiSXqhsROlRIPIYiAW0 RUa2yaSH3TOhsFuLLAw9S38xAh+yIlbS8awzPSrwhlev5TvX6evxbXzcdOQO6qOC3R/6HQHvf Q2eSq9nCA4pAoL2tsj0Ch2T28QAz6+hs0WWoK31dA9yr+WWKRkBGLGtlrwuk5V6w0p001Fmoy +fXMNhtWDuqgdlSFaM1WA/swoqvGPW217zuUhK6epEL+pOc65yMnbYmH+Pun+aXyKiX/om+wa BTGyanaN840B9SR1vwn4+BKBDFZzUZvdn1Fd8rtuRMS0Ua2o3mqNdTx8L5969P6+9haeTDsqJ 9Hvv5v68XHW2G8MGVfuUqJtXNUBAuQIJ/UqH2KNFNoKkQvw9WEvGYb1PH8PGHfh0pTVQ8gno+ TP4Iqq/xUWLxP4MKNS7xIDrhktanZJlC1YXbKS90I+rSrEJ45GmFoQDnX1meuqH/m5S7XbsYU a6d0hu9AFzRZzTOJuiQOvOGyPDVG7VaYy1J+7EEwP/O3CTpLSpuTw3tfQcCPRItgHUE605WOh m9Fc+dantPglFPiI2tk3QlSA8P2LvVatPUBWOzpcKs6FyeA8109JzfgjJZR4WcbONRsKbOHtg oPwtoKWZSIdq3OZ6WRRTmV+aSWLU8Fkh0e3i7KJoJCSDpui6eqnJ9Xe4IF+5lWLT6q418qaQS 9NMw9OjJ81pPpwfJtW7E8K5iMjki+mgSZCIdIA== Subject: [Cake] Peeling question 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, 26 Aug 2015 14:52:43 -0000 Hi Jonathan, hi Dave, I have just been discussing GRO/LRO/TSO/GSO type meta packets (for lack = of a better name) and their influence on temporal traffic shaping = granularity (and fine timescale fairness). I know that cake solves this = problem the most elegant way by peeling/decomposing the meta packets = into nice pMTU sized chunks, but until cake hits openwrt or mainline we = need to get away with bigger hammers, namely disabling meta-packets = entirely. I believe that they need to be disabled on all interfaces to = be effective as say a meta-packets assembled on say a WLAN-interface = with GRO enabled will e passed onto WAN even if the WAN-interface has = GSO disabled, is that correct?=20 So the 1. question boils down to on which interfaces the = offloads need to be disabled, on all interfaces or only on =93real=94 = interfaces? Or more specifically with cerowrt nomenclature: will ge00 be = sufficient or do I also disable it in pppoe-ge00 and ifb4pppoe-ge00? By = default GSO and GRO are enabled on those interfaces? My second question is how do you guys actually test this? How = can I create a situation with a very high likelihood of meta-packets = appearing? (If I know this I can go figure question 1 myself=85) On a related note it would be sweet if cake could report the maximal = sizes of packets it gets fed in and the maximum sizes it ejects; so for = non-peeled meta-packets I expect to see say in: 64K out: 64K and for = peeled rather in: 64K out: 1514 or so. Best Regards Sebastian =09