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 0B49D3B2A2 for ; Wed, 12 Oct 2016 20:26:11 -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 u9D0Q83P004473; Wed, 12 Oct 2016 17:26:08 -0700 Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 17:26:08 -0700 (PDT) From: David Lang X-X-Sender: dlang@asgard.lang.hm To: ching lu cc: Jonathan Morton , cake@lists.bufferbloat.net In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <4D2419FB-6649-4250-9D42-E6EDECFFCCDE@gmail.com> <95CB6153-524D-499A-8E85-231C5098A4DB@gmx.de> <42DC9EF5-80A0-439E-9507-085A0F566B22@gmx.de> User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: MULTIPART/Mixed; BOUNDARY="===============9072622629710842685==" Subject: Re: [Cake] diffserv based on firewall mark 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: Thu, 13 Oct 2016 00:26:12 -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. --===============9072622629710842685== Content-Type: TEXT/Plain; format=flowed; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT On Thu, 13 Oct 2016, ching lu wrote: >> Setting the DSCP with iptables rules should work just as well and in the > same way as using the “firewall mark” functionality as you already do. Set > it up that way in the first instance, directly replacing each HTB+fq_codel > combination with a Cake instance, and see how it works. >> >> - Jonathan Morton > > I might test how cake distribute ingress bandwidth if I use bittorrent and > YouTube at the same time, hopefully ingress traffic has correct DSCP value Ingress traffic probably has no DSCP set. Your ISP would be getting the packets from some other ISP (possibly several layers of this) who get it from the sender. Each time the packet is handed off from one organization to another, the DSCP settings loose their meaning and have a really good chance of being stripped. David Lang --===============9072622629710842685== Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: BASE64 Content-ID: Content-Description: Content-Disposition: INLINE X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18KQ2FrZSBtYWls aW5nIGxpc3QKQ2FrZUBsaXN0cy5idWZmZXJibG9hdC5uZXQKaHR0cHM6Ly9saXN0cy5idWZmZXJi bG9hdC5uZXQvbGlzdGluZm8vY2FrZQo= --===============9072622629710842685==--