From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-yw0-x231.google.com (mail-yw0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::231]) (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 E40353B260; Tue, 26 Apr 2016 19:27:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-yw0-x231.google.com with SMTP id o66so45092509ywc.3; Tue, 26 Apr 2016 16:27:52 -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; bh=b7oP326HUeWRtfY2SHZSC8yI22qB1hWFv82py5lpFbY=; b=oKQG64EDlgFKetndjivYX49uMHK+ywCUrtt4JlQXhKggIj0kDO2m3PYrSSsFfkwrXw 6zIwzI/o0M8Fow7x9uI2Y1lNTmh+o2jgGsX9q8IrVRkhYOxPywXL14oKQf9cSriBXECE cfgyBBmUp3XGmituXnn467Sl4nqwBvn5kwNPFNvgqpEFB3oTtrOh4oS9WPQiFe9Mdlv0 J0oehLm+5XxVX8IuE3giVtyorzuvgf1mJBSO+GRieOdE7StyxbiDIv0BvhyTyGZCkPEH ZAx+nN/QKBLi31NK3N4Up4mcyo1JZCyUNNov0vwJNKfTPPAYfUxLivy6RSP+buWngdvU moHA== 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; bh=b7oP326HUeWRtfY2SHZSC8yI22qB1hWFv82py5lpFbY=; b=iztNc5GdzNtMbrcDup2M4Q0iQBQ+Xb7jJbiNKPNlpi8TRSftxniBP0FxfQyJEUSGfh fMOgezPQCF4ZCWk4iyTQoWDD2bitpNKFX7ydE/valKHtcHnwl3aFL5LtCKZzv1IyywoQ kcPfZCjfuDwsBws9bn/xs4o1FJB7RIc8OqqM2C1p7U5D+HJ2lpDSJzB1cKsC7WoblI2r QQyA4nDGJW0U6TkOEAfEeLdlkLXXNix7BOa8lWh3ay3T9haGKNBOhiNZD/IFJtc/Wtnm ChBd6+RFyIxU/e/QvWlnfKMrxCkfMGrnWZJj3DWsDn8UcVy+xSyJHQjk5m7+8iChKZJi POtA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FXJkJY56YGrXESxOUOVuKSokkfeKWzOOVBFEKaEUwX4UEsZ2kMZVrldY65cHvZcvOkk/kcrAywe/6vF7w== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.159.40.99 with SMTP id c90mr2618244uac.85.1461713272500; Tue, 26 Apr 2016 16:27:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.103.44.70 with HTTP; Tue, 26 Apr 2016 16:27:52 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 16:27:52 -0700 Message-ID: From: Aaron Wood To: Dave Taht Cc: "babel-users@lists.alioth.debian.org" , make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net, "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c0486185efa3805316ba4f5 Subject: Re: [Make-wifi-fast] perverse powersave bug with sta/ap mode 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: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 23:27:53 -0000 --94eb2c0486185efa3805316ba4f5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Has anyone modeled what the multicast to multiple-unicast efficiency threshold is? The point where you go from it being more efficient to send multicast traffic to individual STAs instead of sending a monstrous (in time) multicast-rate packet? 2, 5, 10 STAs? The per-STA-queue work should make that relatively easy, by allowing the packet to be dumped into each STA's queue... -Aaron --94eb2c0486185efa3805316ba4f5 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Has anyone modeled what the multicast to multiple-unicast = efficiency threshold is?=C2=A0 The point where you go from it being more ef= ficient to send multicast traffic to individual STAs instead of sending a m= onstrous (in time) multicast-rate packet?

2, 5, 10 STAs?=

The per-STA-queue work should make that relativel= y easy, by allowing the packet to be dumped into each STA's queue...

-Aaron
--94eb2c0486185efa3805316ba4f5--