From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-yh0-f53.google.com (mail-yh0-f53.google.com [209.85.213.53]) (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 178A421F18A for ; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 06:05:44 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-yh0-f53.google.com with SMTP id v1so6903614yhn.40 for ; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 06:05:43 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=RgWmtYjvJA3h+OpZJKAqbyNamxSEwhNhNzOk4OXKhis=; b=fNy99s5d+uVxaMcf39l2iVqdiptJNHq/K1UXkvEqPG1RNdT8nq9RR8FDWCyhCeCOEQ ToCXycE6ppXzsnIwCvDdllLj3BFa4sS5Su0l4kLmDEW4uVoZIl5XngzGjgNwUCTOkm/I KJ/7i652oB9B7ZUTwPcKVqG30c5oiMxwRtKYrUXCbvQR27j2/3HEN51O9kdOOcSRV8Iv /jMfDOOFX2G2pd32LOtqIX/O2GO+cfwE0ZYmcSZOrBTplkMaHsTd1HcxXV3yzvSfNSeZ NOSv62mQnVpHFLTJ8TSJAltcLoe2bbLCQmV2urR0SXDn7Z1TIrVMPZtXr2SGExCDf+xG qKmQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlP6hbZseyoe7ywtpRhzrzkufAN7JAPJQ3TsXFxNKBldkjVnclPvj/ABRyYBHVxlrPmDskE MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.236.147.129 with SMTP id t1mr6266381yhj.91.1393337142871; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 06:05:42 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.170.140.65 with HTTP; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 06:05:42 -0800 (PST) X-Originating-IP: [198.28.92.5] In-Reply-To: <247B6C2F-1A7E-41F8-9E59-04419060E702@gmx.de> References: <530C7AFA.2070101@gmail.com> <247B6C2F-1A7E-41F8-9E59-04419060E702@gmx.de> Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 15:05:42 +0100 Message-ID: From: Maciej Soltysiak To: Sebastian Moeller Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] uplink_buffer_adjustment 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: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 14:05:44 -0000 On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 1:08 PM, Sebastian Moeller wrote: > TL:DR version, netalyzr probes a buffer depth that while existing has not much relevance on the latency behavior under load for cerowrt. Yes, it doesn't have much relevance for latency where fq_codel or similar are employed. But where it's not (or where fq_codel is defeated by DOS style traffic), it seems this comes back as a meaningful metric. In the end codel is workaround for overbuffering, which is not being removed very hastily. Best regards, Maciej