From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ob0-f171.google.com (mail-ob0-f171.google.com [209.85.214.171]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2089E200994 for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 17:46:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by obqv19 with SMTP id v19so5497675obq.16 for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 17:46:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:x-system-of-record; bh=wYLFXlfTZR7DfL9fEmGfPjGy2oVWgwmvlnjRdxZ53R8=; b=I3p4zvBSDC3ipNLdB36jZR7o+eOh8HlxIRtC8mz6Id+UquOn7s1Ul2BnXYXmZLKmhY X4nEDDsoxV//8ZF1lmgiaWftKd+leaZ0C3eGXngAbF1GbUH44LsTyzd0ePuJ0uZPnXf1 5JOPmRuVfYrgkZZjZq12HIoQqWMe0Ywre3X+ufui8LQZDhS9rHRvu1JRO74JQwb1uZOI tcUk4D5FYngLf1Fq5oVJbZqa2skCq4ltaIsbjPdPWmspr28OYfGZE7KUY5VClFv2mS4a eniE+6POcYUpZcc4+aASBMaoUCFSMDWxtza7EtxtCCsPAh6o8lokL+k/P3iLrrKDu59p 5TDA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:x-system-of-record:x-gm-message-state; bh=wYLFXlfTZR7DfL9fEmGfPjGy2oVWgwmvlnjRdxZ53R8=; b=FBCIszClJC8oIMk2894Ud/uJU1WrLqUwnb6FDYSlgVONx8JFFqFVCNM7Rh8/0a6SM6 GmQHfrhCyuO+kt8smII6D6wzGlME7H0S3A6wb/j7ZpOh+On5DUwbfB+GUDKB2SOEgruI jUT4xYveQlJ1OJqAO+b5Fp1Y+Y5TuSBKUaEtKXhA/f4MyvXBIsWHAOdfzzp6petIqizB n7sx8UIW4ev4adNVgtBp4h5UFNy0Mse99El/N95l+/+4esrO4ZCO4EJQi6yDOGkWHR3C iIFDGlDxj/CCaN9NhycLN6nEcPZX/zeuc0MLG6noyHusNAiGYUOsWwVl507Y3GGEueVY RxJQ== Received: by 10.182.2.165 with SMTP id 5mr33689917obv.41.1342053996153; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 17:46:36 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.182.2.165 with SMTP id 5mr33689885obv.41.1342053995796; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 17:46:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.182.39.131 with HTTP; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 17:46:35 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1342051233.3265.8206.camel@edumazet-glaptop> References: <1342021831.3265.8174.camel@edumazet-glaptop> <1342051233.3265.8206.camel@edumazet-glaptop> Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 17:46:35 -0700 Message-ID: From: Nandita Dukkipati To: Eric Dumazet Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-System-Of-Record: true X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnwjsHkMaMpMNSSIeh5T0iN/YPo2lvF1gHL5hRmgqB06vFVwHNn3KkJLHO7c0J1BW5xiGW5nt88ewC0+qhMicAhpYHrKi0heqIpBRWWTTOaqWq9NhR1OG6HMWWTZgPySSSGWLnSH8Ta43QiCWEu99vaAgyqa5RRm/Tnxc2P96P6QT7DZIYspEbMqEcIT0JF31IgCh4T Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, codel@lists.bufferbloat.net, ncardwell@google.com, David Miller , mattmathis@google.com Subject: Re: [Codel] [PATCH v3 net-next] tcp: TCP Small Queues 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: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 00:46:37 -0000 >> Considering these two points, why TSQ over the Codel feedback >> approach? > > I dont think they compete. They are in fact complementary. > > If you use codel/fq_codel + TSQ, you have both per flow limitation in > qdisc (TSQ) + sojourn time aware and multi flow aware feedback. Makes sense. My conjecture is when using codel/fq_codel qdisc, the need for TSQ will diminish. But as you said... good part of TSQ is it limits per-flow queuing for any qdisc structure, even those not using codel.