From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-x230.google.com (mail-wm0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AFCB83B2A4 for ; Tue, 25 Apr 2017 06:27:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-wm0-x230.google.com with SMTP id r190so91843424wme.1 for ; Tue, 25 Apr 2017 03:27:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=2BLXpYSxzi1FXj8txlXF/TsloXCpmSCmSxniFQ/2vDY=; b=CUrQsH4uhPE/IB//RkzBM1h9Z1Prn81n7y7A2Tb1D+ho8y/KhIQfRPQ6QPafbMVN0Z ifhDmVGTSCSXcDQo3FpV/TTXNbnkLtapiBJXjZugEgx54p0ySaeKcdBbT+a+CVDoQ+J0 txZXoyc9CxzmKuqGfZO3O2xyIfqlPTpxkiarj/zgXy35ef5Ni/eQOt8NN07mCMH6uwrt znlS0Xxiy++JAhqgtZOIP3D9I/YnaeWws1MxotdvrzgwXAwjTAF84lKrWAKKrsPFEbT8 ej9SMYMn//ICvVRSg4c1UI4NyLc6Zb/vOwjUe8qYn3wmKDqcrO2xmEaCLEbQxsKLnAhz 2YxQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=2BLXpYSxzi1FXj8txlXF/TsloXCpmSCmSxniFQ/2vDY=; b=NGkeOHPoDJDaagS8BxcNonyHDFlgYn6t4CJ1XNJDO/zK/6Z59ILJvgWsNRLMXFviFY rsGXWrN/kPHnYTeCioPOPXBeaGUZZBImZEICYM1xMcEnIbcX8rfkJPbcpqluPpTm9F5K R5f9z6lgBpzbbv7EnwYpXWAp1JvoQ3u+pGuZfagbOEpzm2iKMqgtPpOsI8O7QIgvMZs3 5yEWEG3EWKKstIAPWFdlZ6HkBTBD0ImROVU9KjKymDsAwbHa4zXLM5+nPP/WN9R8NV8L LnK/XADwx6knZfOdVpMyTttUvBpWWV4JAIOEep6NYJQXGqHdFCKwudlRVernV0SYJmao ruEA== X-Gm-Message-State: AN3rC/76w8E2b9E+8G7bkcathjvAmhrqFDFx79ayYiKi+WP9BVUFTQr6 NEizAOqwPUHNLw== X-Received: by 10.28.87.70 with SMTP id l67mr1353795wmb.37.1493116019935; Tue, 25 Apr 2017 03:26:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.3] (185.182.7.51.dyn.plus.net. [51.7.182.185]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o77sm25830642wrc.38.2017.04.25.03.26.58 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 25 Apr 2017 03:26:59 -0700 (PDT) To: Dendari Marini , Sebastian Moeller Cc: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net References: <05C0B0C7-4337-4115-AC6B-DA81392FCB34@gmail.com> <22E633CF-5EE0-4B0F-89A8-B790E730FB6C@gmx.de> <0BA3EE91-C5BC-4155-9D5D-D15D34490A1A@gmx.de> <00DDAA0B-7D99-489B-BA2D-1F20289409B3@gmx.de> <2FFBF256-2932-4FC7-AD1F-0D7CEE111809@gmx.de> From: Andy Furniss Message-ID: Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2017 11:26:58 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:54.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/54.0 SeaMonkey/2.51a2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Cake] Getting Cake to work better with Steam and similar applications 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: Tue, 25 Apr 2017 10:27:02 -0000 Dendari Marini wrote: >> FWIW here's a quick example on ingress ppp that I tested using >> connmark the connmarks (1 or 2 or unmarked) being set by iptables >> rules on outbound connections/traffic classes. > > > Unfortunately I'm really not sure how to apply those settings to my > case, it's something I've never done so some hand-holding is probably > needed, sorry. At the moment I've limited the Steam bandwidth using > the built-in Basic Queue and DPI features from the ER-X. They're easy > to set up but aren't really ideal, would rather prefer Cake would > take care about it more dynamically. > > Anyway about the Steam IP addresses I've noticed, in the almost three > weeks of testing, they're almost always the same IP blocks (most of > which can be found on the Steam Support website, > https://support.steampowered.com/kb_article.php?ref=8571-GLVN-8711). > I believe it would be a good starting point for limiting Steam, what > do you think? I think the easiest and most robust way to shape ingress traffic for you would be to do it on the LAN side. If you have multiple interfaces facing LAN then use ifb. I've never used it myself, but to mark multiple address ranges the easiest way would be to use iptables with ipset - there will be many examples to be found on the internet. Even if you do mark (well set dscp cs1) for steam servers you will still need to be backed off from your ingress rate enough or it still won't work as the queue will build up too much on the ISP side of the bottleneck. Shaping ingress is quite different to doing egress as you are at the wrong end of the bottleneck.