From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from bifrost.lang.hm (lang.hm [66.167.227.134]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 382F83B25E for ; Wed, 1 Jun 2016 16:22:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from asgard.lang.hm (asgard.lang.hm [10.0.0.100]) by bifrost.lang.hm (8.13.4/8.13.4/Debian-3) with ESMTP id u51KMYmO018410; Wed, 1 Jun 2016 13:22:34 -0700 Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2016 13:22:34 -0700 (PDT) From: David Lang X-X-Sender: dlang@asgard.lang.hm To: moeller0 cc: Jonathan Morton , cake@lists.bufferbloat.net In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <574EB29B.1000405@darbyshire-bryant.me.uk> <574EB550.5020005@taht.net> <574EB6E2.2020006@darbyshire-bryant.me.uk> <4DDB6EED-A66B-4E34-B233-8DC55F663EBD@gmx.de> <87shwxb1fk.fsf@toke.dk> <574ECB5E.7090605@darbyshire-bryant.me.uk> <0026A232-9D17-40FD-83A4-8575C6FFB8C3@gmx.de> <54AE2960-D312-479D-8411-96993F087EF7@gmail.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="680960-447243277-1464812554=:26452" Subject: Re: [Cake] [lede-project/source] Add support for cake qdisc (#72) 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, 01 Jun 2016 20:22:46 -0000 This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --680960-447243277-1464812554=:26452 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT On Wed, 1 Jun 2016, moeller0 wrote: > Hi Jonathan, > >> On Jun 1, 2016, at 15:51 , Jonathan Morton wrote: >> >> >>> On 1 Jun, 2016, at 15:25, Benjamin Cronce wrote: >>> >>> 1) Ideally, regardless of platform, should an AQM or scheduler have the >>> responsibility of changing anything other than ECN? >> >> This was in part my original objection to having the squash/wash feature in >> Cake. >> >> The other part is that if we are going to rewrite the rest of the TOS byte >> (not just the ECN bits), then we should do it properly, which requires a >> rather substantial extension to the configuration API, even if we only try to >> cover the most obvious use-cases. > > To play devils advocate here, re-mapping to zero might be a special > case, but probably the single most important special case, so lack of > generality is not the strongest argument against it (as long as the goal is > “good enough”). But I already conceded, it is contentious so needs to go, cake > is your “baby” so you have the honor to make such calls… The remap to 0 is arguably not just the most important special case, but the sensible default at any perimeter. Having to setup iptables rules to do so is going to be significantly slower then doing it in Cake. I think this one special case should probably remain. David Lang --680960-447243277-1464812554=:26452--