From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-we0-f171.google.com (mail-we0-f171.google.com [74.125.82.171]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 45DD4208AD0 for ; Sun, 17 Jun 2012 20:10:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: by wejx9 with SMTP id x9so6718200wej.16 for ; Sun, 17 Jun 2012 20:10:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:from:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date :message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding; bh=h57YmET3ngVScl0nNxLs5q9aFzoO0R3BoPyhwb6fIlE=; b=PVyyVZ7l+m00zpYXtMb2ljiPuyMwevwC2M7sjAo6O6s2meuVJM+zcXpnaQ2ElH1d7+ 0o8+YaiI93o4c/gHBb5iOTsZ1TxQXIoMynj7xUNUkbRtJzt73XMUljTPgTJzruah3BLX 7Na3+gPXdkblUataKyUnqiflaMFSaEXxx2VpKL/dpxCfGh5zsULgUoj9ygWsCMD7Va2R gGVI9E28mYF0wsS2XusXneS9UzYhxOq9cOZKdwE0u27Ye9RXwSDCUl3t98O6y20Z9YcG jbaviFDLbdjKPHFCZDeH0d+H8gCLZujF8isAflP1fOwyjMmGB7XepeHlT32LS+TcoNg4 uB8A== Received: by 10.180.98.39 with SMTP id ef7mr20501194wib.21.1339989032174; Sun, 17 Jun 2012 20:10:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.37] (122.237.66.86.rev.sfr.net. [86.66.237.122]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id d3sm39407987wiz.9.2012.06.17.20.10.30 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 17 Jun 2012 20:10:31 -0700 (PDT) From: Eric Dumazet To: Dave Taht In-Reply-To: References: <1339972217-19159-1-git-send-email-dave.taht@bufferbloat.net> <1339985869.7491.262.camel@edumazet-glaptop> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 05:10:30 +0200 Message-ID: <1339989030.7491.328.camel@edumazet-glaptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: codel@lists.bufferbloat.net, Dave =?ISO-8859-1?Q?T=E4ht?= Subject: Re: [Codel] [RFC PATCH] Codel: Enable packet drop with ECN-marked packets on a threshold X-BeenThere: codel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: CoDel AQM discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 03:10:34 -0000 On Sun, 2012-06-17 at 22:40 -0400, Dave Taht wrote: > (side note, I noticed fq_codel defaulted to 10k packets which is > rather excessive for tiny routers - I just trimmed that down > significantly for cerowrt and the upcoming 3.3.8-4 release has the rfc > patch in it) > > And apologies for not seeing this long ago, 10k packets is too small to absorb a burst of 64bytes packets on 10Gb links. Whole CoDel point is to accept packets at enqueue and drop them at dequeue _if_ sejourn time too big. Number of packets should be irrelevant. If you don't know how much packet can be sent on wire per unit of time, just set a reasonable big limit. 1000 packets limit is not reasonable, while 10k is. linux average machines have more ram than tiny routers, dont assume we release specialized code. It should be generic enough, granted it can be easily tuned.