Re: [Cake] cake flenter results round 0

[Pete Heist <peteheist@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1384 bytes --]


> On Nov 26, 2017, at 6:45 PM, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> the real test of a aqm is how it handles a range of rtts in real traffic.
> 
> While a simple, useful test is merely to insert delays of say, 20, 40, 80, 160ms
> inline with
> 
> a real test would have multiple tcp targets of those delays.
> 
> The main trick with using netem properly is to not have it be the
> bottleneck link, and have a huge packet limit, so it doesn't turn into
> your tail loss queue.

Ok, I’ll try to keep this in mind when I get to that.

>> I’m a little lost as to whether or if I need to be using net-next, if I can
>> just use the current netem I have, where to get the latest netem and veth /
>> namespaces stuff, etc...
> 
> A whole lotta namespace stuff landed in net-next, some of which I was
> probably leveraging.
> 
> I kind of need to go heads down this week on finishing up the slotting
> feature in iproute2. And looking over the cake codebase there.

Got it, I’ll gradually figure this out over time. I’ve been enjoying the “simplicity” of RTT, OWD and related stats for a while.

Testing queueing can feel like directing runs at the LHC (not that I’d know). After this is done I think I want to learn some more theory. Sometimes theoretical discoveries can make years of experimental work irrelevant (and vice-versa, I guess).

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 11587 bytes --]