From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wr0-x230.google.com (mail-wr0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c0c::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 880093B2A4 for ; Thu, 6 Apr 2017 08:48:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-wr0-x230.google.com with SMTP id w11so56239438wrc.3 for ; Thu, 06 Apr 2017 05:48:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=OkuEyYs8JQBrBu/bqk7MwYyEzVVR7eIv/cijTvIzQaE=; b=GCI+4pfrd5rIdVLn8tUaFmGTh+BLHxmFBc4UDeno9qoGBnXVnelaG+9pR1Qnn+szA3 4f4l3GmiTYBAKEnA/KRIqRBLN6q9Ubx/KHPMmHenZe3gymibmr2mNPTDvHelRjEf1e59 1jL1PZFaPwraOxb6HXtmtb19Ia9TydmHs5mMbmNRqp0CnPlGHBB7GP3sCbp4iIkNB1FA iH1cy+BU5M0jTAdW2SS6UnF0P43xuG+ksOs29gu3undjfErQjdmjXReAwJp2UnQnSsxr TZ+KmIh3Fn6aWWjrkw6JHErQeNUVPYEgcgeV7/cUtXCU0YVGtHLcFF8gzXY+KDTtZQSu GSgg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=OkuEyYs8JQBrBu/bqk7MwYyEzVVR7eIv/cijTvIzQaE=; b=cPngAboVKrG6KzuxSNz7uytgLpGI3hpGKcuR7cF4+9b6unySwueoCA0ZZ1+WJ67Y9k 9sJ3P3QVWfu8+HaQ1YUnycsWvEqTjDxP7HYLzPBp33wOzhGvte7B9iOtUSkugOq4SuAP Wl5TFGYBievEpQ2kd8+Dagrf4taNq74Tf7T1hT82bS4YijfoltJm4EwXHo+ti8zDqAH7 4SUs90dZmH7LH+93aP66nonI0RnSnCp0TpP83AcE4EsimpO60tRX5hTzdyF6rCJUcdHy Nqc+XLLO9GFugU+yliM+JK6lN5q3Jgmfpx2n64zSyXsJTvHlW/Rdqh7OOCh44+uB2U+L 8AJg== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H0cWejgkpvYloW09BPlRMGS9gAVPU4+Fqdiig7QXLP6wEe5MmMAFG5NucPiPfdBVw== X-Received: by 10.223.138.225 with SMTP id z30mr30747524wrz.26.1491482889094; Thu, 06 Apr 2017 05:48:09 -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 o66sm2309137wmg.33.2017.04.06.05.48.08 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 06 Apr 2017 05:48:08 -0700 (PDT) To: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net References: <2FD59D30-3102-4A3E-A38E-050E438DABF0@gmail.com> <87ziftubgy.fsf@alrua-kau> <8E96329F-A57D-49C7-A7EE-60BD165B4D5C@gmail.com> From: Andy Furniss Message-ID: Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2017 13:48:00 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:49.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/49.0 SeaMonkey/2.46 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <8E96329F-A57D-49C7-A7EE-60BD165B4D5C@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [Cake] flow isolation for ISPs 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, 06 Apr 2017 12:48:11 -0000 Pete Heist wrote: > Cake is not a requirement yet. I like it for several of its > attributes (good performance with high numbers of flows, and also > when “over-limiting”, which I’ll explain more in my next round of > point-to-point WiFi results). Would be nicer for your users though? I mean in the sense that if the "outer" hash could be done on some mark then the inner hash on connection as normal then they would get more than a fifo, which seems to be how current solutions are heading. TBH, though I don't even get your set up - I mean is WISP like some giant lan, or does anyone that asks get a real IP, do subscribers normally have more than one access point? Just curious.