From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-io1-xd44.google.com (mail-io1-xd44.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d44]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CE4813CB36 for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2019 06:57:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-io1-xd44.google.com with SMTP id m24so80876513ioo.2 for ; Tue, 23 Jul 2019 03:57:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=AY8QbCnYjSWBZQtjlEs3WiENBhaT4Uo2lEDnAmJLPao=; b=fbPUAMzwNwdnahQfX4/W9Acb3VuxnohQEx3ul7hZrstxf0EqatFPIMwjcDCxjDJwcY MA9CwmiyANXqdzBXbyzZM3lbg9RxHdDgfnVshRTdCn69TJcDtrp6+o30sQwCq8wLX+LP xUwvQ01b2F2IoynBEh3hO9fnBjoLM+1qBle/PwUbfrvN68OSk0ppwj2pdtmowV8NE9yZ PcOO6jZ7FNZyQhXNgpCaSLPBw0TB/xyialACkemAruFmc5X28/r7PVtBm1IgsoZbrgmw fn52SlI7Y3KtNBZORNZnWJ0OReWymHRNNfCTei7M/s9T+/+blAXNpBWUxyFnQmduN10U M7BA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=AY8QbCnYjSWBZQtjlEs3WiENBhaT4Uo2lEDnAmJLPao=; b=G2EI7eeKLc287DS0oPYC3RyQ9ScWf4ZDIpXG/lw2LcDBYHkDreEiz1SN6OTe9GgzJ9 x/1wwfh3KzlDmyTpmwEGNap2Tjl/btdUM9oax4N+vQqMDRVMHSXqnKi0zUT7pnB5javE ES1CKxf5R396ibWeqVGuXD0JEUZnYgQGn/dr8R40qCaQzpVPOjjELGKTT5slbjRrEcWa lZLJuVZUEK6Cgi5fXQTbb4DAJZ5RfGwA8ndu0+VH9upV3gttvgP6uLU4B9U2biADp+KT 3sFrcT7OS4mfRK7sc5j9yNXxzXAwNGl/bgiqXfjAXIwqOUyxDD3uYkLw0o4uyH5MAre3 9vVQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAX63xp8H43bwxKzqC4Sheh0o+2IW9laHMHCPteeyUD3bleBCRBx nIhRe6Xdc/Tu0V0RIUum3pu209X4VRNWx+lOY/8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqz342eeUcQ9TD9Wv22Zbnhm/iGNToLZlAktthAtWVnQ+Yv3l3dn44IBw9UT3S0YP8PX4iH8f+Fev8uUivWarbA= X-Received: by 2002:a6b:dd17:: with SMTP id f23mr57397503ioc.213.1563879461123; Tue, 23 Jul 2019 03:57:41 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <7C7CE2C6-DCB2-4AEB-BB6B-44A707180D7A@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: From: Dave Taht Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 03:57:29 -0700 Message-ID: To: Mikael Abrahamsson Cc: Sebastian Moeller , "ecn-sane@lists.bufferbloat.net" , Dave Taht , "tsvwg@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 10:57:41 -0000 On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 11:21 PM Mikael Abrahamsson wrot= e: > > On Tue, 23 Jul 2019, Sebastian Moeller wrote: > > > That, and most other features the linux network stack offers (it > > is easier ot be fast if you do less ;) ) I believe users need to > > actively enable HW offloading, so shpould be in control whether they > > want to trade in a ship-load of features for alloing their router to > > punch well above its weight... > > On most HGW SOCs today the choice between HW offload on/off is 200 > megabit/s unidirectional with large packets, or very close to wirespeed. > > Anyhow, my statement is that of the users today on the Internet, their > congestion point will not have FQ enabled, and this for 99% of users. I > don't see any trend that this is on the verge of drastically increasing > either. > > The trend I am seeing is that delay control is being deployed by means of > RED, buffer size caps (basically implementing adaptive buffers to only > provide 10ms buffering until tail drop), PIE/CODEL or similar. I don't see a trend on "RED" - I see existing implementations. Certainly most hardware offloads have fairly short buffer sizes. I have been hoping for a pie implementation in non-cable-hw for years now. The title of this mail could just as well been, "have any hw offload makers been paying the slightest bit of attention to fixing bufferbloat with *any* aqm or fq tech?" - with an answer of no. On 10gige+ ethernet cards, 64 hw queues is the norm. That's fq. There's some support for aqm on some. I think the work on timerwheel paced stuff has high potential. In the switch chip market we see big buffered switches and small buffered ones, targetted at different markets. There's work in p4 that's promising on the switch front. We've hit it out of the park on wifi, with atf and fq_codel. Very visible "trend" there. What happens in the offloaded word on small routers like the edgerouter series is to do "qos" at a lower than line rate, offloads are disabled and it's done in software. The tit > I'd be happy to be proven wrong. > > -- > Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht CTO, TekLibre, LLC http://www.teklibre.com Tel: 1-831-205-9740