From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.15]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mout.gmx.net", Issuer "TeleSec ServerPass DE-1" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A8CD121F776; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 03:38:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from u-089-d090.biologie.uni-tuebingen.de ([134.2.89.90]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx001) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0Lp3Lw-1YgCgW2gOi-00ev8k; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 12:38:48 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) From: Sebastian Moeller In-Reply-To: <55B09C76.20907@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 12:38:45 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <55B09C76.20907@gmail.com> To: Alan Jenkins X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:95lcJ7nYAXS9uV5iilGg2quTBvGzqlbo8lMlbpUXMdsWr4Q0VLS 6Kz7fGmUA5sZTTWsa3j8AwXJqspxHQ3dmiPl+LOhG2AQHfvHTeMFxlV4h1VZTBoTNRXyuX7 FSpbeClOsKC20SCYofw2oxAq+ek468GbQJ5UfwHco8aCh01Xb/H7cJjNP4YJsZoXB/HAQGe 5qpdZla511Y11H5PbrUrQ== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:QvS+Sh33QH4=:LaF3++lg3P9NtAPb0PqM96 Co0bdVZpgVMzoy2Yk0NTq7KL+X2o6PNaaSczeDVQZqQ1zGQUc2sJUO4x7n41yywIBSRgmSJFW TjfPIB1xXGcK/UjDZl7FaVobM6AMxqTE98pIfJ7rqVGXhf+CrS48a287vFQcpWWqARbS+oS8l bUFZ8Me8Dxe7ik6LagWxHB5afRPCWUAtLTVJIwci5SrMsKKWouxNEFuxxFjSubNGhNXiRwqEa f87wRnzPXr18oOjUvWefXfodK+Vj7R6QC5bQyjoxGtyLYRdF39qojsbELrzUXYSD+igTjIVg/ 4ZvPZzcOCG3Cs6zKRMF9SYcQfL718oOvHdHnv8h9FerYLNz+VaPdNWEIvv7RlWUzyEtDHUoIg 0Wdg31rcrDPcpPxLHlTdnCf1MrfyELmQpjcGvs3CduOXYaFLk3jbCsZpGJHw4Jjbx78QFmykD xMpPRLPD1loEha+rCTuPb5b13wRUNmxo/QKXK/y3QaKSuOb64EcyzJ9IYxn7PCfsysBsOvCZo Y/QGwXeUY9xs8MYry/PW1t6mBjoNO9osiKt1XZW5GNhqsosRr4ozKvsDvNcwZcEwW7gvtJjJw /5ZFvJNa7iz8+3OOLPa8lYQPqJYevM8D3YuznWy2Uj3jhaU5uBbnRZGVjulRwZMA4VFWZaLZr W/A+4J6/OSxbYQ45jNe8lhV9aV0PnBnzfnoeRXsc7xuN7lQC3vsL51rOUwRignvolXNg= Cc: Jonathan Morton , cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net, make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net Subject: Re: [Make-wifi-fast] [Cerowrt-devel] Fwd: [tsvwg] Comments on draft-szigeti-tsvwg-ieee-802-11e X-BeenThere: make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 10:39:21 -0000 Oh, boy, On Jul 23, 2015, at 09:49 , Alan Jenkins = wrote: > On 23/07/15 08:44, Jonathan Morton wrote: >>=20 >> Link to the spec? >>=20 >> - Jonathan Morton >>=20 >>=20 >=20 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-szigeti-tsvwg-ieee-802-11e/ Not that I am a domain expert, but the whole web of slightly = different versions of the same madness are quite amusing ;) What seems = clear to me is that the wealth of 64 possible combinations looks a lot = like a slippery slope (or better like a full blown slip and slide).=20 As far as I can see, hardware folks and MPLS opted for 3 bits = maximum (I take it that wifi is actually 2 bits only), so what real use = is in schemes using more than 8 different states beyond that mapping = 12/16/64 to 8 is a fun exercise in bike-shedding=85=20 But since bike shedding is fun here is my =93I am not even confused by = partial knowledge=94 proposal for a 3+1bit marking scheme: 1) take the most significant 3 bits to deduce the CS equivalent = (willfully ignoring the lower 3 bits) which will be treated as priority = levels 2) decide were in the 3 bit range the =93normal should be=94, say 3 for = example (to allow simplistic mapping to 2bit patterns) 3) extend by 1 bit at the end to get to 4 bits (I guess that would be = shift by 1 bit?) 4) remark/remap the CS0 equivalent as =93normal=94 + 1 (alternatively = remap CS0 to =93normal=94 and the CS that used to live there to = =93normal=94+1) Heck even just staying at 3 bits and just remarking CS0 to CS3 should do = the trick, of putting in a lower priority class below the default = best-effort traffic and still keep 802.11 mappings semi-working And then just treat these as 8 different priority levels with the number = coding the priority order using Jonathan=92s approach of pairing higher = priorities with lower guaranteed bandwidths allotments. Blissfully ignore the proposed differentiation of the lower 3 bits until = there is proof that they are actually helpful... I really wonder what the whole brouhaha is all about; wikipedia = tells me ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11e-2005 ) that = Enhanced distributed channel access (EDCA) is sort of a best effort QoS = system (what?) and that HCF Controlled Channel Access (HCCA) is where = things should be going. Because then the AP manages all air time and all = stations and the AP can do =93normal=94/high level priority queueing = into the wifi adapters best-effort queue without the need for the = =93crazy" that is implementing media access as a race (especially with = many clients that just does not sound like an efficient approach). But = then I do not claim to be an expert in these matters. Best Regards & sorry for the gantlet above Sebastian >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Make-wifi-fast mailing list > Make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/make-wifi-fast