Re: [Codel] [Bloat] The challenge

[Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>]

I

On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 10:55 PM, Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 9 May, 2012, at 4:04 pm, Kevin Gross wrote:
>
>> From the paper (figure 7), you can see that CoDel still leaves spikes of buffer occupancy when network conditions change. These will still be disruptive to real-time traffic. Many networks that need QoS now will still need QoS. Networks that do not have QoS will be much more usable with CoDel.
>
> Combining AQM with FQ certainly seems like a good idea to me.  I haven't had a chance to try the implementation of fq_codel which already exists yet, but it's compiled and just waiting for me to get around to it.  If it works, then it should be an excellent default.

I would certainly like more folk to analyse fq_codel, particularly in
the context of TCP mice and what we call ANTs these days. It seems to
be really excellent, but I too haven't had much time to look at it,
yet. It certainly does an even better job than codel of allowing
sparse streams through in my own testing, and I run it by default on
my laptops, wireless gear, routers and desktop at present. Under heavy
load things like cerowrt and ssh and other stuff like mosh, remain
incredibly responsive.

With ponies that good, there has got to be some manure somewhere.

>  - Jonathan Morton
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bloat mailing list
> Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat



-- 
Dave Täht
SKYPE: davetaht
US Tel: 1-239-829-5608
http://www.bufferbloat.net