From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <fred@cisco.com>
Received: from mtv-iport-1.cisco.com (mtv-iport-1.cisco.com [173.36.130.12])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
	(Client CN "mtv-iport-1.cisco.com", Issuer "Cisco SSCA2" (verified OK))
	by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC14D201B52;
	Wed,  9 May 2012 13:06:43 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;
	d=cisco.com; i=fred@cisco.com; l=632; q=dns/txt;
	s=iport; t=1336594004; x=1337803604;
	h=subject:mime-version:from:in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id:
	references:to:content-transfer-encoding;
	bh=sLPNXz4GVi/Q7OwLYZOzoe3nt2AOJkDtUxXgNtcx+3E=;
	b=VRqsNhvIRoxmEJY73RDf2FNXJ+pp2LuoHBHX4p4pQDe8nFctUJJr8J4X
	ST7+QeIfiLMuZKbWakoHLFExkuRwF/3F2EXaCpumlUikBbLwzEndN6VSU
	b5sg9TAxQKTCWaUCOuRn1Z/GKnJT2crWbULHS2f1s3YyGbFUkonZg0E0v w=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av0EAEvNqk+rRDoJ/2dsb2JhbABEsz2BB4IMAQEBAwESASc/BQsLRlcGNYdnBJtbjWGSOIsMhS9jBIhkjRmFdohigWmDBw
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.75,559,1330905600"; d="scan'208";a="41055091"
Received: from mtv-core-4.cisco.com ([171.68.58.9])
	by mtv-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 09 May 2012 20:06:42 +0000
Received: from Freds-Computer.local (sjc-vpn7-1308.cisco.com [10.21.149.28])
	by mtv-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q49K6eFS030479;
	Wed, 9 May 2012 20:06:41 GMT
Received: from [127.0.0.1] by Freds-Computer.local (PGP Universal service);
	Wed, 09 May 2012 15:06:42 -0500
X-PGP-Universal: processed;
	by Freds-Computer.local on Wed, 09 May 2012 15:06:42 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
From: Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <4FA9FDC0.9010600@superduper.net>
Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 15:06:31 -0500
Message-Id: <44673AC5-4320-4C19-9788-87A63C47549D@cisco.com>
References: <CAA93jw7EUSf-NAg9q6oxRms5LQopO-VseYUtXAyCkUi=Yitx-g@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FA9FDC0.9010600@superduper.net>
To: Simon Barber <simon@superduper.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 09 May 2012 13:13:06 -0700
Cc: codel@lists.bufferbloat.net, bloat <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: [Codel] [Bloat] The challenge
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: Wed, 09 May 2012 20:06:44 -0000


On May 9, 2012, at 12:16 AM, Simon Barber wrote:

> One question now remains - will codel AQM be sufficient on it's own in =
getting delays down to levels that users are happy with for the common =
latency sensitive interactive traffic - VoIP, gaming and Skype for =
example - or are the further reductions that can be had with traffic =
classification and smart queuing algorithms necessary?

In my opinion, AQM is enough to get traffic into the "reasonable" range, =
but if you're looking for a specific SLA that might be applicable to =
gaming etc, you will need to do some engineering in terms of diffserv =
etc.=