From: Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>
To: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: [Cake] Fwd: flow_hash vs host_hash
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 18:18:38 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <EFD57D98-D1A3-41F9-B9B2-277658AFC424@gmx.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <D12F3403-F1BB-46F1-9908-50D9470F4D82@gmx.de>
Dear list,
I promise one of these days I am going to learn to use reply all instead of just reply; it is just not today it seems… So let me add basically a me too to Jonathan and David...
Best Regards
Sebastian
Begin forwarded message:
> From: Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>
> Subject: Re: [Cake] flow_hash vs host_hash
> Date: October 6, 2015 at 15:38:02 GMT+2
> To: Dave Täht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
>
> Hi Dave,
>
> On Oct 6, 2015, at 14:51 , Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> In most scenarios the top level hash for per station queuing on
>> ethernet would be
>> source or destination macaddr, thus bypassing ipv4 or ipv6.
>
> Silly question, is this also true for a routed segment? I was under the impression that if wlan and lan are not bridged in a router packets being passed to the WAN interface all carry the router’s MAC address as SRC, in other words that MAC addresses are only reliable in individual L2-segments… (this in turn could be used as an argument for L2-bridging in smallish home environments)
>
> Best Regards
> Sebastian
>
>>
>> Then below that goes the 5 tuple.
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 12:59 PM, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
>>> Hi Jonathan,
>>>
>>> On Oct 6, 2015, at 10:44 , Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 6 Oct, 2015, at 11:39, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@toke.dk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Ah, I see. I guess you are right, but on egress we could get back to
>>>>>> the pre-nat addresses, like Vincent does in nxt_routed_hfsc.qos?
>>>>
>>>> I can’t immediately see how that works.
>>>>
>>>>> Ah, so there is a hook to get those; cool. Just need to make sure Cake
>>>>> uses that, then :)
>>>>
>>>> I think the better solution would be to implement that in the flow dissector. Then Cake (and all other relevant qdiscs) will receive that information automatically.
>>>
>>> Certainly. But all of this hopefully does impede the implementation of the dual-flow-classifiying cake-mode; as even without those refinements the dual-mode should work well for IPv6 (assuming people do not game this by using excessive amounts of addresses per host) and non-NATed IPv4…
>>>
>>> Best Regards
>>> Sebastian
>>>
>>>>
>>>> - Jonathan Morton
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Cake mailing list
>>> Cake@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Dave Täht
>> Do you want faster, better, wifi? https://www.patreon.com/dtaht
>
parent reply other threads:[~2015-10-06 16:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
[parent not found: <D12F3403-F1BB-46F1-9908-50D9470F4D82@gmx.de>]
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=EFD57D98-D1A3-41F9-B9B2-277658AFC424@gmx.de \
--to=moeller0@gmx.de \
--cc=cake@lists.bufferbloat.net \
/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