[Cake] Recomended HW to run cake and fq_codel?
moeller0 at gmx.de
Mon Nov 27 10:54:19 EST 2017
how about keeping it simple and just give the latency increment under full (bidirectional) link saturation (I guess a catchy acronym might be found)? Yes this is a number where lower is better, but it also has immediate information (like: "mmmh, at an added 3seconds under load, VoIP might suffer a bit if I start heavy torrenting...").
I am not opposed to the inverse per se and I also like the "bigger is better" property, but mental division is hard and the period seems to be more informative than the frequency. But at this point anything that will get some traction will be a winner...
> On Nov 27, 2017, at 13:47, Pete Heist <peteheist at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Nov 27, 2017, at 1:04 PM, Jonathan Morton <chromatix99 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> My pet suggestion here is to represent latency as its inverse, "responsiveness" with units of Hz. This has the dual advantages of bigger numbers being better, and the figures being directly comparable with framerates.
>> As you say, the methodology will need to be very carefully specified, so that we get a meaningful measurement that's hard to game.
> I like that idea...
> Then it’s how to measure it. 1 / latency where latency is what…the maximum value you’ll see considering all traffic as besteffort at a fixed number of concurrent flows? Otherwise it would have do be expressed differently for different traffic classes, which is probably already too complicated for most people.
> Food for thought, I know this is the opposite direction, but I’ve always liked in Europe how car “mileage” is expressed as consumption (L/100km) instead of efficiency (miles/gallon). Yes, then a lower number is better, but it’s easier to calculate how much gas you’ll use for a given trip.
> Cake mailing list
> Cake at lists.bufferbloat.net
More information about the Cake