From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <chromatix99@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-lb0-x231.google.com (mail-lb0-x231.google.com
	[IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::231])
	(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 B30ED21F1BC
	for <codel@lists.bufferbloat.net>; Wed, 18 Mar 2015 08:20:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by lbbsy1 with SMTP id sy1so32184372lbb.1
	for <codel@lists.bufferbloat.net>; Wed, 18 Mar 2015 08:20:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date
	:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to;
	bh=m/DbgjSuuZv3Wiz/rNTdRmOIULZRyNgtJwSofEmyRYU=;
	b=I+zA76vje7eOznpUKJ2V1m2T3yF+Fa+4HDR7T0lZ7jKrLBQ3FUAZkIok2xSV8N1RBK
	K0hmVZLrSJDEr18EWgegUvhP5v9XNWN5n64fS5nuQnDDzXFosmQwOA1JOjwH4gVmaunu
	kOq92ZeychZxIxVQYX2hlfHFdS5bWBpc4SsE2RJT4msDWg+FIyCnkf9uyV79Wf0WRina
	gbmnDSxEutv5kUnDA+sQw9nJd8/imexZcSjUrAdWy/FQSMBic20z3VcVJmtjJbKFp1Dz
	pt9peGw78EeHxFyPH7uLI0EN9oH6Jmmc5zEb9KM9DqqwUN4uyNKBYwchlMyxW/yfeIgy
	JMrQ==
X-Received: by 10.112.73.104 with SMTP id k8mr63117498lbv.120.1426692011169;
	Wed, 18 Mar 2015 08:20:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.43.25] (188-67-138-157.bb.dnainternet.fi.
	[188.67.138.157])
	by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id x5sm3437574laa.44.2015.03.18.08.20.09
	for <codel@lists.bufferbloat.net>
	(version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
	Wed, 18 Mar 2015 08:20:10 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2070.6\))
From: Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <5509957B.30600@pollere.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2015 17:20:05 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <491C7497-BE3E-452B-A797-C7FC1102E7ED@gmail.com>
References: <7081A75C-899A-4DB7-8D77-935A37B362D8@gmail.com>
	<5509957B.30600@pollere.com>
To: codel@lists.bufferbloat.net
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2070.6)
Subject: Re: [Codel] The next slice of cake
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, 18 Mar 2015 15:20:42 -0000


> On 18 Mar, 2015, at 17:10, Kathleen Nichols <nichols@pollere.com> =
wrote:
>=20
> How are you relating target delay to bandwidth?

Essentially, I use 5ms as a minimum, and increase it if necessary to =
accommodate a couple of MTU-sized packets at the shaping rate.  This =
keeps things nicely under control at low bandwidths, and I find that =
cake remains useful and usable even at 64Kbps (without making even the =
usual adjustments to host or link configuration for such low speeds).

I can do this in cake because the shaping rate is known, whereas the =
pure codel and fq_codel qdiscs do not have reliable link-speed =
information.

- Jonathan Morton