From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <toke@toke.dk>
Received: from mail.toke.dk (mail.toke.dk [IPv6:2a00:7660:6da:2001::664])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A72623CB47
 for <ecn-sane@lists.bufferbloat.net>; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 13:05:13 -0400 (EDT)
From: Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= <toke@toke.dk>
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=20161023;
 t=1563815111; bh=2NVFBJFTaApQXldlR24nqsprN43c2VtBeLkuJ4zTQuI=;
 h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From;
 b=IqeGZz/17kgGFUUOuUINKIQaRHCB/LfjeRNSMmR05gXguighyY1ak/T5WdS27+M0Y
 7iehrTg8lWdv1cSEiGifjDgC1gY6GQVK0Bgh6BhuLx/kHX2SmBmZKtI7WH2CIS9kSR
 X4iD6/9eCvIwAVMLVvQ8We2Yk/9R1FKHvIgdS4w6QYxeJq0FOGr9U9IrsjdSQ4xyQv
 MQtIQGsi89bKZdeh9MWuUWF+vy/bS113PK+YnGez0hzGA7M6zo9sv1/YoN+XWal+9v
 qO/lxRPO0LtN10IpxPA7gBC3ycTvSb/ASnmRZywBLcQ3VOnXIZl3CYiz0sEr2zteEQ
 J5sP+9DKBnklA==
To: Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>,
 Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
Cc: Jonathan Foulkes <jfoulkes@evenroute.com>,
 "ecn-sane\@lists.bufferbloat.net" <ecn-sane@lists.bufferbloat.net>,
 Dave Taht <dave@taht.net>, "tsvwg\@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <CEECD0B0-7081-42DE-AA2C-5061749C9232@gmail.com>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1907221609330.19225@uplift.swm.pp.se>
 <CEECD0B0-7081-42DE-AA2C-5061749C9232@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 19:05:10 +0200
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
Message-ID: <87sgqy3sqh.fsf@toke.dk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Subject: Re: [Ecn-sane] is FQ actually widely deployed?
X-BeenThere: ecn-sane@lists.bufferbloat.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of explicit congestion notification's impact on the
 Internet <ecn-sane.lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/options/ecn-sane>,
 <mailto:ecn-sane-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/ecn-sane>
List-Post: <mailto:ecn-sane@lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Help: <mailto:ecn-sane-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/ecn-sane>,
 <mailto:ecn-sane-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 17:05:13 -0000

Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com> writes:

>> On 22 Jul, 2019, at 10:14 am, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> wrote:
>> 
>> Do we have numbers on how much FQ is actually out there? If we don't,
>> can we measure it? Anyone know of devices shipping or being designed
>> that does FQ of some kind?
>
> Linux and OSX end hosts now routinely run fq_codel by default. That's
> an awfully large installed base, both of FQ and of Codel. It is
> perhaps worth observing that these are rarely bottlenecks for Internet
> paths, though they might be for LAN paths.
>
> The IQrouter is probably the best example of a commercial middlebox
> that does FQ, in this case using Cake. I hear that it is now being
> sold in re-branded form to certain large ISPs, but I could be wrong
> about that. I've CC'd Jonathan Foulkes for comment.
>
> There's also a large French ISP which has done fq_codel on its last
> mile for quite some time.

I am aware of at least two Danish and one Norwegian ISP that have
deployed FQ-CoDel-based shapers either as their customer shapers in the
backend or on CPEs.

Anything derived from OpenWrt will also use FQ-CoDel on both WiFi and
wired links. Not sure how common those are, though...

-Toke