[Cake] cake exploration

Sat Apr 11 15:12:19 EDT 2015

16) Better VPN handling

5 flows of encapsulated vpn traffic competes badly with 5 flows of
(say) bittorrent traffic.

We could give the ipsec form of vpn traffic a boost by explicitly
recognising and classifying the AH and ESP headers into a different
diffserv bin.

Similarly, tinc and openvpn, could use a port match.

On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 11:48 AM, Dave Taht <dave.taht at gmail.com> wrote:
> 15) Needs to work so an ISP can create service classes for their customers
>
> DRR 1: cake bandwidth X
> DRR 2: cake bandwidth Y
> DRR 3:
>
> I have no idea whether this can work at all, last I tried it DRR would
> stall everytime fq_codel had no packets to deliver.
>
> A related issue is that there needs to be a way to have a tc or
> iptables filter to map multiple IPs and addresses so that they return
> a single distinct integer for placement into such queue systems
> so that a lookup of someone that has x.y.x.z, q.f.b.a/24, j:k:h/64 and
> l:m:n/48 can return a single integer representing the customer so it
> can be fed into the above correct sub-queuedisc.
>
> I think, but that is not sure, that is all my backlog!
>
> On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 11:47 AM, Dave Taht <dave.taht at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 14) strict priority queues. Some CBR techniques, notably IPTV, want 0
>> packet loss, but run at a rate determined by the provider to be below
>> what the subscriber will use. Sharing that "fairly" will lead to loss
>> of packets to those applications.
>>
>> I do not like strict priority queues. I would prefer, for example,
>> that the CBR application be marked with ECN, and ignored, vs the the
>> high probability someone will abuse a strict priority queue.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 11:45 AM, Dave Taht <dave.taht at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 12) Better starting interval and target for codel´s maintence vars in
>>> relationship to existing flows
>>>
>>> Right now sch_fq, sch_pie give priority to flows in their first IW
>>> phases. This makes them vulnerable to DDOS attacks with tons of new
>>> flows.
>>>
>>> sch_fq_codel mitigates this somewhat by starting to hash flows into
>>> the same buckets.
>>>
>>> sch_cake´s more perfect hashing gives IW more of a boost.
>>>
>>> A thought was to do a combined ewma of all active flows and to hand
>>> their current codel settings to new flows as they arrive, with less of
>>> a boost.
>>>
>>> This MIGHT work better when you have short RTTs generally on local
>>> networks. Other thoughts appreciated.
>>>
>>> There is another related problem in the resumption portion of the
>>> algorithm as the decay of the existing state variables is arbitrary
>>> and way too long in some cases. I think I had solved this by coming up
>>> with an estimate for the amount of decay needed other than count - 2,
>>> doing a calculation from the last time a flow had packets to the next,
>>> but can´t remember how I did it! It is easy if you have a last time
>>> per queue and use a normal sqrt with a divide... but my brain crashes
>>> at the reciprocal cache math we have instead....
>>>
>>> I am not allergic to a divide. I am not allergic to using a shift for
>>> the target and calculating the interval only relative to bandwidth, as
>>> mentioned elsewhere. At 64k worth of bandwidth we just end up with a
>>> huge interval, no big deal. But plan to ride along with the two
>>> separately for now.
>>>
>>> 13)  It might be possible to write a faster codel - and easier to read
>>> by using a case statement on the 2 core variables in it. The current
>>> code does not show the 3 way state machine as well as that could, and
>>> for all I know there is something intelligent we could do with the 4th
>>> state.
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 11:44 AM, Dave Taht <dave.taht at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Stuff on my backlog of researchy stuff.
>>>>
>>>> 1) cake_drop_monitor - I wanted a way to throw drop AND mark
>>>> notifications up to userspace,
>>>> including the packet´s time of entry and the time of drop, as well as
>>>> the IP headers
>>>> and next hop destination macaddr.
>>>>
>>>> There are many use cases for this:
>>>>
>>>> A)  - testing the functionality of the algorithm and being able to
>>>> collect and analyze drops as  they happen.
>>>>
>>>> NET_DROP_MONITOR did not cut it but I have not looked at it in a year.
>>>> It drives me crazy to be dropping packets all over the system and to
>>>> not be able to track down where they happened.
>>>>
>>>> This is the primary reason why I had switched back to 64 bit timestamps, btw.
>>>>
>>>> B) Having the drop notifications might be useful in tuning or steering
>>>> traffic to different routes.
>>>>
>>>> C) It is way easier to do a graph of the drop pattern with this info
>>>> thrown to userspace.
>>>>
>>>> 2) Dearly wanted to actually be doing the timestamping AND hashing in
>>>> the native skb
>>>> struct on entry to the system itself, not the qdisc. Measuring the
>>>> latency from ingress from the
>>>> wire to egress would result in much better cpu overload behavior. I am
>>>> totally aware of
>>>> how much mainline linux would not take this option, but things have
>>>> evolved over there, so
>>>> leveraging the rxhash and skb->timestamp fields seems a possibility...
>>>>
>>>> I think this would let us get along better with netem also, but would
>>>> have to go look again.
>>>>
>>>> Call that cake-rxhash. :)
>>>>
>>>> 3) In my benchmark of the latest cake3, ecn traffic was not as good as
>>>> expected, but that might have been an anomoly of the test. Need to
>>>> test ecn thoroughly this time, almost in preference to looking at drop
>>>> behavior. Toke probably has ecn off by default right now. On, after
>>>> this test run?
>>>>
>>>> 4) Testing higher rates and looking at cwnd for codel is important.
>>>> The dropoff toke noted in his paper is real. Also there is possibly
>>>> some ideal ratio between number of flows and bandwidth that makes more
>>>> sense than a fixed number of flows. Also I keep harping on the darn
>>>> resumption algo... but need to test with lousier tcps like windows.
>>>>
>>>> 5) Byte Mode-ish handling
>>>>
>>>> Dropping a single 64 byte packet does little good. You will find in
>>>> the 50 flow tests that a ton of traffic is acks, not being dropped,
>>>> and pie does better in this case than does fq, as it shoots
>>>> wildly at everything, but usually misses the fat packets, where DRR
>>>> will merrily store up an entire
>>>> MTU worth of useless acks when only one is needed.
>>>>
>>>> So just trying to drop more little packets might be helpful in some cases.
>>>>
>>>> 6) Ack thinning. I gave what is conventionally called "stretch acks" a
>>>> new name, as stretch acks
>>>> have a deserved reputation as sucking. Well, they dont suck anymore in
>>>> linux, and what I was
>>>> mostly thinking was to drop no more than 2 in a row...
>>>>
>>>> One thing this would help with is in packing wifi aggregates - which
>>>> have hard limits on the number of packets in a TXOP (42), and a byte
>>>> limit on wireless n of 64k. Sending 41 acks from
>>>> one flow, when you could send the last 2, seems like a big win on
>>>> packing a TXOP.
>>>>
>>>> (this is something eric proposed, and given the drop rates we now see
>>>> from wifi and the wild and wooly internet I am inclined to agree that
>>>> it is worth fiddling with)
>>>>
>>>> (I am not huge on it, though)
>>>>
>>>> 7) Macaddr hashing on the nexthop instead of the 5tuple. When used on
>>>> an internal, switched network, it  would be better to try and maximize
>>>> the port usage rather than the 5 tuple in some cases.
>>>>
>>>> I have never got around to writing a mac hash I liked, my goal
>>>> originally was to write one that found a minimal perfect hash solution
>>>> eventually as mac addrs tend to be pretty stable on a network and
>>>> rarely change.
>>>>
>>>> Warning: minimal perfect hash attempts are a wet paint thing! I really
>>>> want a FPGA solver for them.... dont go play with the code out there,
>>>> you will lose days to it... you have been warned.
>>>>
>>>> http://cmph.sourceforge.net/concepts.html
>>>>
>>>> I would like there to be a generic mac hashing thing in tc, actually.
>>>>
>>>> 8) Parallel FIB lookup
>>>>
>>>> IF you assume that you have tons of queues routing packets from
>>>> ingress to egress, on tons of cpus, you can actually do the FIB lookup
>>>> in parallel also. There is some old stuff on virtualqueue
>>>> and virtual clock fqing which makes for tighter
>>>>
>>>> 9) Need a codel *library* that works at the mac80211 layer. I think
>>>> codel*.h sufficies but am not sure. And for that matter, codel itself
>>>> seems like it would need a calculated target and a few other thing to
>>>> work right on wifi.
>>>>
>>>> As for the hashing...
>>>>
>>>> Personally I do not think that the 8 way set associative has is what
>>>> wifi needs for cake, I tend to think we need to "pack" aggregates with
>>>> as many different flows as possible, and randomize how we packet
>>>> them... I think.... maybe....
>>>>
>>>> 10) I really dont like BQL with multi-queued hardware queues. More
>>>> backpressure is needed in that case than we get.
>>>>
>>>> 11) GRO peeling
>>>>
>>>> Offloads suck
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Dave Täht
>>>> Let's make wifi fast, less jittery and reliable again!
>>>>
>>>> https://plus.google.com/u/0/107942175615993706558/posts/TVX3o84jjmb
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dave Täht
>>> Let's make wifi fast, less jittery and reliable again!
>>>
>>> https://plus.google.com/u/0/107942175615993706558/posts/TVX3o84jjmb
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Dave Täht
>> Let's make wifi fast, less jittery and reliable again!
>>
>> https://plus.google.com/u/0/107942175615993706558/posts/TVX3o84jjmb
>
>
>
> --
> Dave Täht
> Let's make wifi fast, less jittery and reliable again!
>
> https://plus.google.com/u/0/107942175615993706558/posts/TVX3o84jjmb

-- 
Dave Täht
Let's make wifi fast, less jittery and reliable again!

https://plus.google.com/u/0/107942175615993706558/posts/TVX3o84jjmb