From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-bk0-f43.google.com (mail-bk0-f43.google.com
	[209.85.214.43]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
	(Client did not present a certificate)
	by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DBA55201261
	for <codel@lists.bufferbloat.net>; Tue,  4 Sep 2012 08:34:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by bkty15 with SMTP id y15so4047108bkt.16
	for <codel@lists.bufferbloat.net>; Tue, 04 Sep 2012 08:34:19 -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=IKh46s46WoPQgcv4kj8GJwJFcG8bUx1a9hKFz+FoBqY=;
	b=ERs5SeDYGW9R7Ktz9lavotOwBBcet4ecf6+Cc8F/RRrgen8XSFZYKmfenFBBlraCCD
	HULKZAHYxZ0XAAcWPpEITPNVA16FZfAFDh9Q4yrkL/GGssdwXbVfEhDEuuWPbDCBcfxj
	8G9mUGO4KdjyDbe3PvJbH8vUCvPtxPC3qmkcug4JdI/bzDycGSV5PQoSLbJjG0z2Bgc9
	aZarCD/sfwEiGSP/UZPCkLzjAhjCImkErRoZNZky7EpExff0tu+qkQIVzcoW8o0nzv0V
	U/Jh+SDYGxd8NCkPEGiE1QPQwcSn3GdKl5/W3NSox86AtgSyMLvh1umFiZSPBBypsn1y
	4stg==
Received: by 10.204.130.146 with SMTP id t18mr8324162bks.65.1346772859795;
	Tue, 04 Sep 2012 08:34:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.142.158] ([74.125.121.33])
	by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id m9sm10765675bkm.10.2012.09.04.08.34.16
	(version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 04 Sep 2012 08:34:18 -0700 (PDT)
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
To: Nandita Dukkipati <nanditad@google.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAB_+Fg5xPRqEZNdH0mYogmm4LitMvycSLB-X1_7ryn4RY9FvSA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1346396137.2586.301.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
	<1346421031.2591.34.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
	<1346421466.2591.38.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
	<CAK6E8=cwpq0MVK6fcrOa=wTX237xQiVP2xzh0aX-AtuSmzt-sw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1346503884.7996.65.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
	<CAB_+Fg5xPRqEZNdH0mYogmm4LitMvycSLB-X1_7ryn4RY9FvSA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2012 17:34:15 +0200
Message-ID: <1346772855.13121.40.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.3 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Tomas Hruby <thruby@google.com>, netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	codel@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: [Codel] [RFC v2] fq_codel : interval servo on hosts
X-BeenThere: codel@lists.bufferbloat.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13
Precedence: list
List-Id: CoDel AQM discussions <codel.lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/options/codel>,
	<mailto:codel-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/codel>
List-Post: <mailto:codel@lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Help: <mailto:codel-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/codel>,
	<mailto:codel-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2012 15:34:22 -0000

On Tue, 2012-09-04 at 08:10 -0700, Nandita Dukkipati wrote:
> The idea of using srtt as interval makes sense to me if alongside we
> also hash flows with similar RTTs into same bucket. But with just the
> change in interval, I am not sure how codel is expected to behave.
> 
> My understanding is: the interval (usually set to worst case expected
> RTT) is used to measure the standing queue or the "bad" queue. Suppose
> 1ms and 100ms RTT flows get hashed to same bucket, then the interval
> with this patch will flip flop between 1ms and 100ms. How is this
> expected to measure a standing queue? In fact I think the 1ms flow may
> land up measuring the burstiness or the "good" queue created by the
> long RTT flows, and this isn't desirable.
> 

Well, how things settle with a pure codel, mixing flows of very
different RTT then ?

It seems there is a high resistance on SFQ/fq_codel model because of the
probabilities of flows sharing a bucket.

So what about removing the stochastic thing and switch to a hash with
collision resolution ?