From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.core-networks.de (mail.core-networks.de [82.96.72.7]) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D03F21F0B3 for ; Thu, 28 May 2015 00:00:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by mail.core-networks.de id 1Yxrnl-0004SV-88 with ESMTPSA (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) for cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net; Thu, 28 May 2015 09:00:25 +0200 Message-ID: <5566BD00.2010205@openwrt.org> Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 09:00:16 +0200 From: Steven Barth User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Cerowrt-devel] Is ingress QoS worth the pain? X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 07:01:10 -0000 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