Hi, Am 03.07.2015 um 12:16 schrieb Toke Høiland-Jørgensen: > Polina Goltsman <[email protected]> writes: > >> As I understand the FQ-Codel draft, it seems to be fundamental to >> FQ-Codel that each queue has separate state variables. So my question >> is: is it indeed fundamental ? > > I suppose that becomes a matter of semantics: What exactly do you mean > by 'fundamental'. If you mean "an integral part of the current > algorithm", then yes. If you mean "it's unthinkable to build a similar > algorithm without the separate state variables" then no. I understand > Fred's comment to take the second interpretation. :)
I guess Polina's point was: it is a question how "similar" two realizations of PIE would be if one applies PIE per flow like in FQ-Codel or alternatively (as proposed by FQ-PIE) FQ first and then PIE working on the aggregated queue. Was it a deliberate choice for the latter and if so, why? It would be good to document this difference to FQ-Codel explicitly. Regards, Roland _______________________________________________ aqm mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm
