From: Steven Barth <cyrus@openwrt.org>
To: "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net"
<cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: [Cerowrt-devel] Is ingress QoS worth the pain?
Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 09:00:16 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5566BD00.2010205@openwrt.org> (raw)
Hi everyone,
again a bit of a basic question, but what are the advantages of doing
ingress shaping in SQM?
To me it wastes a lot of CPU cycles (decreases forwarding performance)
and you can't really "unsend" any packets from the ISP. What I mean is
in 99% of cases your internal forwarding capacity is usually (much?)
bigger than what the ISP sends to at any rate.
What do I miss here? Some effects on TCP rate-limiting?
Cheers,
Steven
next reply other threads:[~2015-05-28 7:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-05-28 7:00 Steven Barth [this message]
2015-06-03 4:47 ` Dave Taht
2015-06-03 10:04 ` Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant
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/cerowrt-devel.lists.bufferbloat.net/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5566BD00.2010205@openwrt.org \
--to=cyrus@openwrt.org \
--cc=cerowrt-devel@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