Cake - FQ_codel the next generation
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pete Heist <peteheist@gmail.com>
To: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: [Cake] diffserv3 tin 2 target 50% of interval?
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 11:17:11 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <FE6323FC-1A04-4FF7-AEE0-9364B9692AAC@gmail.com> (raw)

Hi, I’m finally getting to diffserv testing and am wondering about the tin 2 parameters of the default ‘diffserv3':

             Tin 0       Tin 1       Tin 2  
  thresh    3125Kbit      50Mbit   12500Kbit
  target       5.8ms       5.0ms       5.0ms
interval     100.8ms     100.0ms      10.0ms
Pk-delay         0us         0us         0us
Av-delay         0us         0us         0us
Sp-delay         0us         0us         0us
…

My understanding from the latest CoDel RFC: https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-aqm-codel-06.txt

and notes in the Overview section of this document from K. Nichols: http://www.pollere.net/Pdfdocs/noteburstymacs.pdf

are that ‘interval' should generally remain at 100ms and that ‘target' should be computed at around 5-10% of interval, and preferably closer to 5%.

In my testing, which I’ll release more results from soon, I’ve seen no significant benefit to changing target or interval from their defaults for either Wi-Fi or 100Mbit wired links. I question that lowering tin 2’s interval to 10ms provides any benefit, and in fact could very well cause undesired behavior for those using the defaults.

I could provide a spread of tests comparing ‘diffserv3' to ‘diffserv4’ for rrul at various bandwidths, but since ‘diffserv4’s tins all have standard 5/100 target and interval parameters, that seems preferable to the default of ‘diffserv3’. Is there a justification for setting the interval outside the guidelines suggested by CoDel’s authors?

Pete


             reply	other threads:[~2017-02-22 10:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-02-22 10:17 Pete Heist [this message]
2017-02-22 10:24 ` Jonathan Morton
2017-02-22 11:12   ` Pete Heist
2017-02-22 11:24     ` Jonathan Morton
2017-02-22 11:32       ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2017-03-19 15:41         ` Pete Heist
2017-02-22 12:44       ` Pete Heist

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=FE6323FC-1A04-4FF7-AEE0-9364B9692AAC@gmail.com \
    --to=peteheist@gmail.com \
    --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