From: Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>
To: Pete Heist <pete@heistp.net>
Cc: ecn-sane@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: [Ecn-sane] fq_codel_fast ECN signals vs number of flows
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2019 20:54:39 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <D829D382-05F9-4F9D-92DF-DAEB54D76F58@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <70B7A260-EFBC-4556-88E5-B241C4B7ADA9@heistp.net>
> On 20 Mar, 2019, at 8:49 pm, Pete Heist <pete@heistp.net> wrote:
>
> It’s still surprising though that with one flow that there’s really just one CE signal then that’s it, yet the rate is limited without drops. Is that somehow caused by TSQ?
Yes, that's expected in Linux if the bottleneck queue is local to the sender.
- Jonathan Morton
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-03-20 18:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-03-20 18:49 Pete Heist
2019-03-20 18:54 ` Jonathan Morton [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://lists.bufferbloat.net/postorius/lists/ecn-sane.lists.bufferbloat.net/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=D829D382-05F9-4F9D-92DF-DAEB54D76F58@gmail.com \
--to=chromatix99@gmail.com \
--cc=ecn-sane@lists.bufferbloat.net \
--cc=pete@heistp.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox