From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <simon@superduper.net>
Received: from masada.superduper.net (masada.superduper.net [85.119.82.91])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(Client did not present a certificate)
	by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 632BC201B52;
	Wed,  9 May 2012 13:03:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from snappy-wlan.parc.xerox.com ([13.1.108.21])
	by masada.superduper.net with esmtpsa
	(TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <simon@superduper.net>)
	id 1SSD5X-0007hb-Kl; Wed, 09 May 2012 21:02:20 +0100
Message-ID: <4FAACD48.9040100@superduper.net>
Date: Wed, 09 May 2012 13:02:16 -0700
From: Simon Barber <simon@superduper.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686;
	rv:12.0) Gecko/20120430 Thunderbird/12.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Roger_J=F8rgensen?= <rogerj@gmail.com>
References: <CAA93jw7EUSf-NAg9q6oxRms5LQopO-VseYUtXAyCkUi=Yitx-g@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FA9FDC0.9010600@superduper.net>
	<CAKFn1SHdQyXMcaGgksA98HSgRymHC4Vp0wx-DiLwatShdUDmAg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAKFn1SHdQyXMcaGgksA98HSgRymHC4Vp0wx-DiLwatShdUDmAg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Spam-Score: -2.9 (--)
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 20:03:27 -0000

significant queues only form where there is a bottleneck, so there 
should not be long cascades of codel actually dropping.

Simon

On 05/09/2012 12:10 PM, Roger Jørgensen wrote:
> On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 7:16 AM, Simon Barber<simon@superduper.net>  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? The nicest part about codel on it's
>> own is that it works on opaque packets - it will handle VPNs and traffic
>> within them nicely. It gets away from all the complexity required to
>> classify traffic in a world where traffic is often trying to hide.
>
> I'm more worried about how long cascades of codel code in equipment
> will work together, add lots of traffic to the mix, just how will it
> behave then?
>
>
>