From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ob0-x236.google.com (mail-ob0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::236]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E75DE21F1CC; Wed, 10 Jun 2015 12:53:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: by obbgp2 with SMTP id gp2so42471289obb.2; Wed, 10 Jun 2015 12:53:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=1deSniVMbrGf02QVoM8Mlt8gYfSyLd0QM6xcm54ZtfU=; b=PeH+B5F847xleHD5avTLYqUzFsBVEADyeISmocplH4g1gatMZUqreovgTN55q55xyl qSalSdsM2BiHkSwz4BfNGIISief38qbKXW/7XvHImoQ+Gck92+6aOObh4aGYVmNt+DGa Iuqt5C6Cy4N9rgW8No+4VnCZdsgwLltBG1sGMbtK1lovNIDinfWg67YrzJ8WshUFjlv6 VuAplJ/Shb33+X0LQPkOG/wQjLfwbP5ALMGTZtZNDk4c2G+bL9DqLE4RE7Yxk5svMQbx whrCZrXW3MaP+PmSR54cmVvNC3kHE3TJSMnxyJQfzGBUQK8Krg39EzXy3NDCp71Ctgk7 hDIw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.73.199 with SMTP id n7mr4312419oev.39.1433966000695; Wed, 10 Jun 2015 12:53:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.202.105.129 with HTTP; Wed, 10 Jun 2015 12:53:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 12:53:20 -0700 Message-ID: From: Dave Taht To: Daniel Havey , bloat , cake@lists.bufferbloat.net, "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [Cerowrt-devel] active sensing queue management 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: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 19:53:50 -0000 http://dl.ifip.org/db/conf/networking/networking2015/1570064417.pdf gargoyle's qos system follows a similar approach, using htb + sfq, and a short ttl udp flow. Doing this sort of measured, then floating the rate control with "cake" would be fairly easy (although it tends to be a bit more compute intensive not being on a fast path) What is sort of missing here is trying to figure out which side of the bottleneck is the bottleneck (up or down). --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht What will it take to vastly improve wifi for everyone? https://plus.google.com/u/0/explore/makewififast