From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from bifrost.lang.hm (mail.lang.hm [64.81.33.126]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E793B21F406; Fri, 12 Jun 2015 21:34:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asgard.lang.hm (asgard.lang.hm [10.0.0.100]) by bifrost.lang.hm (8.13.4/8.13.4/Debian-3) with ESMTP id t5D4Yjwc001048; Fri, 12 Jun 2015 21:34:45 -0700 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2015 21:34:45 -0700 (PDT) From: David Lang X-X-Sender: dlang@asgard.lang.hm To: Daniel Havey In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <5578DEE8.6090209@gmail.com> <2ACEC68A-3795-4F7C-BA0F-FBDBA3732566@gmx.de> <557AD7F1.1000808@gmail.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net, Alan Jenkins , "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" , bloat Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] [Bloat] [Cake] 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: Sat, 13 Jun 2015 04:35:21 -0000 On Fri, 12 Jun 2015, Daniel Havey wrote: >> ii) Sebastian points out if you implement AQSM in the modem (as the paper >> claims :p), you may as well BQL the modem drivers and run AQM. *But that >> doesn't work on ingress* - ingress requires tbf/htb with a set rate - but >> the achievable rate is lower in peak hours. So run AQSM on ingress only! >> Point being that download bloat could be improved without changing the other >> end (CMTS). >> > This is pretty cool. I had not considered BQL (though Dave and Jim > were evangelizing about it at the time :). This solves the > upload/download problem which I was not able to get past in the paper. > BQL on the egress and ASQM for the ingress. BQL will make sure that > the upload is under control so that ASQM can get a good measurement on > the download side. Woot! Woot! Uncooperative ISP problem solved! > > BTW...Why doesn't BQL work on the ingress? for the same reason that AQM doesn't work on inbound connections. you're on the wrong side of the link :-) implementing AQM and BQL on the ISPs device that's sending to the home user is a perfectly reasonable thing to do and is really the right answer for the problem. all the rest of this is a matter of "we can't get at where the problem really is to fix it, so let's figure out what else we can do to mitigate the problem" David Lang