From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-oa0-x235.google.com (mail-oa0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c02::235]) (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 2238B200619 for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 13:38:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oa0-f53.google.com with SMTP id k14so10399631oag.12 for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 13:38:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=lElnbpt9u07e+xdyXMEvULzSV60ivUU/e5q7BuqntSI=; b=PMFuk1k69YgZF8dtn4cs1lKAa6k1v2uQmqVZqtlDXqt9sdXtv8p3nBlR4zvwzS7WnJ Fv9WEtR3/6yufbJOAEltU52Yo+iloinCFpbGWs4jnD5vSbbYi9+F2l/gTppijpR2aVaa 6gD2hOCJIiUgMDMqokuTZWHFHGoQE4qRfx2p+OaGmliZ6ZUU8sUFWKU+qz1bQiXrvDmR cAJ7zqGMJQ+QarCMJjHhq6qorx3aIrWj1REK3mbW6w9rvH92vBJALENZIYm6F1ENzgFF emMCLwBoSaBVi3UsjM5ZUngwx6HUNnp/VLDk9JRuorWNk4d0s6hrrx5BjdQdagKD8eZ8 SLNg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.182.130.228 with SMTP id oh4mr29654673obb.38.1373488710191; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 13:38:30 -0700 (PDT) Sender: gettysjim@gmail.com Received: by 10.76.144.67 with HTTP; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 13:38:30 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 16:38:30 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: Q7PL6cfbx-X9QhDENMDZ3jdkF1g Message-ID: From: Jim Gettys To: Keith Winstein Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0115ed26ac916504e12e429c Cc: "codel@lists.bufferbloat.net" Subject: Re: [Codel] sprout 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, 10 Jul 2013 20:38:31 -0000 --089e0115ed26ac916504e12e429c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Keith, On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 4:19 PM, Keith Winstein wrote: > Thank, Dave. > > We have a Web site with more info, a talk, and source code ( > http://alfalfa.mit.edu) if anybody is interested. > > Something that may interest folks here is that we compared > Sprout-over-unlimited-buffer with TCP-Cubic-over-CoDel on these > cellular-type links. That is, a scenario where the network operators > implemented CoDel inside the LTE/UMTS/1xEV-DO base station (for the > downlink) and the phone manufacturers implemented CoDel inside the > "baseband" chip for the uplink. > > Bottom line results is that for the case where a cellular user can contro= l > all their own flows, it's roughly a wash. To a first approximation, you c= an > fix bufferbloat on a cellular network *either* by putting CoDel inside th= e > base station and baseband chip (and otherwise running the same endpoint > TCP), *or* by changing the endpoints but leaving the base station and > baseband chip unmodified. > Did you compare with fq_codel? None of us (Van included) advocate CoDel by itself. > > Obviously we benefit dramatically from the per-user queues of the cellula= r > network. By contrast, in a typical house with a bufferbloated cable modem > where one user can cause big delays for everybody else, you can't fix > bufferbloat by fixing just one endpoint. We will have some results soon o= n > whether you can fix it by fixing all the endpoints (but still leaving the > "bloated" gateway intact). > Yup, per user queues help. But those per-user queues can be extremely large; you can hurt yourself as soon as you want to mix your WebRTC kind of traffic with anything else. Jim > > Cheers, > Keith > > On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Dave Taht wrote: > >> I haven't been paying a lot of attention to rmcat and webrtc until >> recently, although I'd had a nice discussion with keith on it a while >> back.. >> >> this particular thread sums up some interesting issues on that front. >> >> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rmcat/current/msg00390.html >> >> -- >> Dave T=E4ht >> >> Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt: >> http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.html >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Codel mailing list > Codel@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/codel > > --089e0115ed26ac916504e12e429c Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Kei= th,


On W= ed, Jul 10, 2013 at 4:19 PM, Keith Winstein <keithw@mit.edu> = wrote:
Thank, Dave.

We have a We= b site with more info, a talk, and source code (http://alfalfa.mit.edu) if anybody is interes= ted.

Something that may interest folks here is that we compa= red Sprout-over-unlimited-buffer with TCP-Cubic-over-CoDel on these cellula= r-type links. That is, a scenario where the network operators implemented C= oDel inside the LTE/UMTS/1xEV-DO base station (for the downlink) and the ph= one manufacturers implemented CoDel inside the "baseband" chip fo= r the uplink.

Bottom line results is that for the case where a cellular user can cont= rol all their own flows, it's roughly a wash. To a first approximation,= you can fix bufferbloat on a cellular network *either* by putting CoDel in= side the base station and baseband chip (and otherwise running the same end= point TCP), *or* by changing the endpoints but leaving the base station and= baseband chip unmodified.

Did you compare with fq_codel? =A0None of us (Van included) advocat= e CoDel by itself.

Obviously we benefit dramatically from the per-user que= ues of the cellular network. By contrast, in a typical house with a bufferb= loated cable modem where one user can cause big delays for everybody else, = you can't fix bufferbloat by fixing just one endpoint. We will have som= e results soon on whether you can fix it by fixing all the endpoints (but s= till leaving the "bloated" gateway intact).

Yup, per user queues help. =A0But those per-user queues can be extr= emely large; you can hurt yourself as soon as you want to mix your WebRTC k= ind of traffic with anything else.

Jim

Cheers,
Keith

On Wed, Jul 10= , 2013 at 3:30 PM, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:<= br>
I haven't been paying a lot of attention= to rmcat and webrtc until
recently, although I'd had a nice discussion with keith on it a while back..

this particular thread sums up some interesting issues on that front.

http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rmcat/current/msg0= 0390.html

--
Dave T=E4ht

Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt: http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscrib= e.html


_______________________________________________
Codel mailing list
Codel@lists.bufferbloat.net<= /a>
= https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/codel


--089e0115ed26ac916504e12e429c--