From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-oi0-x236.google.com (mail-oi0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::236]) (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 563903B25E for ; Thu, 12 May 2016 11:59:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-oi0-x236.google.com with SMTP id x19so126660413oix.2 for ; Thu, 12 May 2016 08:59:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Shqe89HMC5ofi6wbyNiqYSRQz7mgAwlJfX2N2jgc6Z8=; b=oHOH0+iryVCEpoqzq6k+RQ+kjj9vSyxafQPpAy6QZdiosx9bajkuwEBzNQxxjWBICF K2v6wXxxKO6WfT6feGasSZdtwxx8PaTahtWj+g8v8DfWn2gHjRzUKPBJhOQae/xOBdpq V23HtNiDGe8RKNy+g92co9PucuZFudEprk2WRpZptFkWHIRrcMhQC6nT1NhT4r3d0FBh ywAEEB9AUg99uibtrX3ckcHJyFeswO+8ZkZWNAF3eQ4YKNuOeNLTIIBhhkpd1Xepn7a0 GzeK8X0h4EDo6+KGHv4wLONDBARI3PPGigka1R0tVy2fJGUpKTRIfgzdzwaxzFZ4Mw3/ 3kOw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Shqe89HMC5ofi6wbyNiqYSRQz7mgAwlJfX2N2jgc6Z8=; b=FoDQJNJ/YTVTDLfFaTwoGNuRYgy0vgLgZlfg3Z4ew+4q/VgfmVsE2CcggZv+2/Rubg qXnDZ90Qee8AYkRpg4U2DsCB6QBnBkCSfiLVFeT3ZwNi79MJZ4Mk290Ez46X8xL1Cn3D xVR0f9n24C+ThBAFYRXM2ejgBLUS70vvI4xF5Hc72RlChU/rP8Z63rzk+AQfPB97TWMD wR+VV1+8oDnutc6nA1sx2Ug1BDz771Y1y8Uum2xmWM7qmPS8Vyb+dC4QjeyNC0acc+wD UxqBIl27nlrbSADg+l1xi4ofriMsk+SYEcvbgCGg+02eFPiwxKLKNh2MALlPgUSFuDXu S6hA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FXyxnDWeJC4fb2Z2TQnSfcIN58xH8z0P4lx494E2tgWM5FYVvIYOyOFlycCmSkp7rSG7Gu+gSy3SVRv8g== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.202.216.68 with SMTP id p65mr5964859oig.152.1463068787832; Thu, 12 May 2016 08:59:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.202.229.210 with HTTP; Thu, 12 May 2016 08:59:47 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87futolndh.fsf@toke.dk> References: <871t58n5wk.fsf@toke.dk> <87futolndh.fsf@toke.dk> Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 08:59:47 -0700 Message-ID: From: Dave Taht To: =?UTF-8?B?VG9rZSBIw7hpbGFuZC1Kw7hyZ2Vuc2Vu?= Cc: Luca Muscariello , make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Make-wifi-fast] Thoughts on tackling airtime fairness X-BeenThere: make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 15:59:48 -0000 On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 6:45 AM, Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen wrote: > Luca Muscariello writes: > >> Toke, >> >> I'd suggest to add this in you list of references: >> >> Godfrey Tan and John Guttag, Time-based fairness improves performance in= multi-rate WLANs. In Proc of USENIX 2004 >> https://www.usenix.org/legacy/publications/library/proceedings/usenix04/= tech/general/full_papers/tan/tan.pdf > > Awesome, was not aware of that. Thanks! > >> It's worth having a look to the APware project for freeBSD and Godfrey T= an PhD thesis at MIT. >> >> http://nms.csail.mit.edu/projects/apware/ > > Hmm, that link is not working for me right now; will try again later. http://web.archive.org/web/20150911055537/http://nms.csail.mit.edu/projects= /apware/ >> this work predates 802.11n and aggregation. > > Yeah, I'm aware that there is a lot of stuff that predates 802.11n. In > fact the article I linked (Kim et al) is the only one I've found that > talks about 802.11n. We also had some people at my uni doing stuff with > 802.11g. > >> Ten years ago I played with SFQ and madwifi for 802.11g to get max-min >> time fairness (and so proportional rate fairness) with excellent >> results. The hacking I made was based on using time quanta instead of >> bytes. Which required me to get the current PHY rates (AP to all >> STAtions) and dynamically compute/update SFQ time quanta. > > Do you happen to recall what precision you achieved or how much the > precision was really important? Several papers seem to assume that very > high precision is not terribly important since it all evens out in the > end, and I can see how that could be true; but would like to have it > confirmed :) > >> It's surprising that 802.11 standard never considered time fairness in >> the EDCF. A reason might be the time fairness might be enforced using >> the PCF. > > Might be. Might also be that no one thought to measure for that? A lot > of vendors seem to only test single-station raw throughput... > > Are you aware of any open source 802.11 stuff that uses PCF at all? > >> IMO, It's a very good topic. >> Thanks for bringing this up. > > You're very welcome! ;) > > -Toke > _______________________________________________ > Make-wifi-fast mailing list > Make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/make-wifi-fast --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht Let's go make home routers and wifi faster! With better software! http://blog.cerowrt.org