From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (unknown [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5513621F15A; Wed, 28 Nov 2012 10:38:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from obiwan.sandelman.ca (desk.marajade.sandelman.ca [209.87.252.247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D17B2016E; Wed, 28 Nov 2012 13:39:56 -0500 (EST) Received: by obiwan.sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id 6D76F63A8E; Wed, 28 Nov 2012 13:37:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from obiwan.sandelman.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by obiwan.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EC8163A8C; Wed, 28 Nov 2012 13:37:37 -0500 (EST) From: Michael Richardson To: "codel@lists.bufferbloat.net" , "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" , bloat , John Crispin In-Reply-To: <20121128174440.GD2474@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20121127224915.GM2474@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20121128002710.GS2474@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <50B5887C.7010605@pollere.com> <20121128043838.GX2474@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20121128160133.GA16995@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20121128174440.GD2474@linux.vnet.ibm.com> X-Mailer: MH-E 8.3; nmh 1.3-dev; XEmacs 21.4 (patch 22) X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m Sender: mcr@obiwan.sandelman.ca Subject: Re: [Codel] [Bloat] [Cerowrt-devel] FQ_Codel lwn draft article review 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: Wed, 28 Nov 2012 18:38:06 -0000 >>>>> "Paul" == Paul E McKenney writes: Paul> You lost me on this one. It looks to me like Paul> net/sched/sch_fq_codel.c Paul> in fact does hash packets into flows, so FQ-CoDel is Paul> stochastic in the Paul> the same sense that SFQ is. In particular, FQ-CoDel can hash a thin Paul> session into the same flow as a thick session, which really is the Paul> birthday effect. Silly question from someone who should read more code, but... if one is hashing the packet to pick a flow bucket, shouldn't this hash occur before any application of address/port translation. ? (NAT) (Maybe I've just found out that IPv6 + CoDel will be a killer combination)