From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.19]) (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 09C003B2A4 for ; Wed, 21 Aug 2019 03:44:49 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1566373487; bh=ng3dqu1APStRc89dNAlzPvMyeran5dzE+cuQtZMIG3U=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=Sv05r2ut8evPwy71Ax+l1eiLED8cVfx3BfTh3I4iyNsc8fKwlzMhGFdb+as+U3F5T GTzFHqR/T6ck351YwSiBmq4S17DJ8NxmcyJIoDs+RBweMRfOEQVg9w1sfeKAqMC4TX UHCstqe7Gq7hf8LQRz9KtDKsTDlpWJT9WhsbxLAo= X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c Received: from [10.11.12.32] ([134.76.241.253]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx003 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0M7pku-1iDJoV1v3w-00vPSZ; Wed, 21 Aug 2019 09:44:47 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\)) From: Sebastian Moeller In-Reply-To: <384866b4-4c91-cf2c-c267-ee4036e5fbf7@newmedia-net.de> Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 09:44:46 +0200 Cc: =?utf-8?Q?Dave_T=C3=A4ht?= , "cake@lists.bufferbloat.net >> Cake List" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <384866b4-4c91-cf2c-c267-ee4036e5fbf7@newmedia-net.de> To: Sebastian Gottschall X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11) X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:a4O8uFvntPMVCBIEIENBLcmYogm42dLNPLhaSbQqiy8N7i0xceE s1RyqSkxDMndZoMbxifK8YH8LJsuxEAVpw0IXtXWh42LHEJ7+BdLr9FsuyHXBbtxdJQXwD+ UZ/950p+jNx7N7ZyuzTCoba5V9cLlDCnfTJEX6+kle5nBum5V+Xq8qF+tqy5ikGCvB1iB3h FwDh1KwxdADkk8u7rq79Q== X-Spam-Flag: NO X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:W0c2dK9+i98=:37my/4dkgbiFUUj1FYuEaw lGVhljhsqsII2Zq3XZBKqqFCmVGmceZ+lK9V+jgjZNF1mGUWUPz/pOH4X815NwMyHkjdJcEpH ulq5GBRebV8XwNUCPIe3GPF1rJwGHr7Jd0IpptGf8+P63A3mudLwSQhTgDzau0rhsm5Bg0HoE LqYJSekOBOzC2PX/mKNJ1+MD4J2ukOpGLIZdEj6XAdvf8LT7brQaJZb/8QVISgVWhiDBoKe5u PH9nePkmBTyozpI0o8rv7HXVDo4Bkf+iogpac2ZSWPc04NFTfTZoYNIaVZgB4YNlxZJYByRu9 gDU26pfOygqjIl6Lc2UB+qMaN9PXuYEDNf2VYS8APq6GlFXaYh4MVgKyZ0xkuYh2/We/sjX68 zk2BoJ0/G7a0FzjgfG4SIZE//XiyU9CUe8KcpyqdELy9nkwVXPt2vhkJGP9f9TMy9AVh9L+PE qrF5HooS7AdgP43VtmhVp2GTOZHWP0MQZeun3uIlr8qyEp9MXgxrI1d1pSjl+T/Lq2lxGgdw/ AECZ3j3tsdL72I31Fp3Fw1otgD0DLf4/2/bYf2vJuKRHwuBDCc0fDLRJCQ+dT2Ql2dASTrb93 6PcIvJoFvWNVHrVqs3MkAQHpe0ho8z3ptjL5T4YhHrsYDXvOvZjv6wSnefsrXeaTgZlhpfEft 5Pxmua8buRW2RCjpjRZ0QXOnFHe2tVWvwGEDC3nlYp3Gw1uKVdimXnLl9KPxIDquTi5ZJWMGW x+8AiNXSNuH65gGueMR/1BvBY1oXL8Fm2mLFkHVFdHamZ32ZCYhmEdTBrIvWUfSP0I9qLSB36 zHZ08BXgXPIit059/MMpGF1p9ct3h/TMDSQiQBV3cOIX0ByaNO0+AogoGc+/mZcmH9r/qshyI C1GFDavDpjNqj3ymkZ2L015707IA9LZ0L8lcGEfs6lNqQsR9zj8Cgt8/iMlhxUFw95ZwyDN5P G9vqcNm5DLHen3vyofz/RuQWl49ZYJZQBY9wAvL9LTYDk/eO3YVNDhSKqvOvZWZ/2ZfHYuyFp +RdI8vgz8XSYKlAHCACRQETdLOBGvZShXVEhyPQVVFheVzSoyWD8Y7I6DtOU//hBdpM3MGreu tBeovbmw+TzZWtPFw9yqB4W2lCZ6v7OMQEdHhRUSir19QhXYBEW+t8eA+vUX0UXPTA6osDX8U yKuc8= Subject: Re: [Cake] cake in dd-wrt 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, 21 Aug 2019 07:44:50 -0000 > On Aug 20, 2019, at 18:47, Sebastian Gottschall = wrote: >=20 >=20 > Am 20.08.2019 um 18:24 schrieb Dave Taht: >> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 5:09 AM Sebastian Gottschall >> wrote: >>> [...] >>=20 >> If I had any one principal request it would be to make sure the = dd-wrt >> gui (if one is made) exposes the link layer parameters. Getting the >> framing wrong is about the biggest error I see in the deployment: >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DLjJW_s5gQ9Y > i have seen this already. out plan here is that the user specifies the = internet connection type like vdsl2, cable, whatever in case of cake = which then will be used > as argument Good goal, that also is theoretically well supported by cake = with its multitude of encapsulation/overhead realated keywords. = Unfortunately reality is not as nice and tidy as this collection of = keywords implies, There are 8 keywords for ATM/AAL5 based encapsulations = (ADSL, ADSL2, ADSL2+, ...), 2 for VDSL2, 1 for DOCSIS, 1 for ethernet, = for a total of 12 that all can be combined with one or more VLAN-tag = keywords, for a total of 24 to 36 combinations. (And these are not even = exhaustive, as e.g. the use of ds-lite can increase the per-packet = overhead for IPv4 packets by another 20 bytes). Ideally one would just empirically measure the effective = overhead and use the "overhead NN mpu NN" keywords instead, but that has = issues as measuring overhead empirically is simply hard... The best bet = would be to leverage BEREC to require ISPs to explicitly inform their = customers of the effective gross-rates and applicable overheads for each = link, but I am not holding my breath. Over at = https://openwrt.org/docs/guide-user/network/traffic-shaping/sqm we tried = to give simplified instructions for setting the overheads for different = access technologies, but these are not guaranteed to fit everybody (not = even most users, as we have no numbers about the relative distributions = of the different encapsulation options). Best Regards "another" Sebastian