On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 10:13 AM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <[email protected]> wrote: > "Alia Atlas" <[email protected]> writes: > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> COMMENT: >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> I think it would be useful to have a reference to the Linux >> implementation ("current" version and pointer). > > Hi Alia > > I've added a reference pointing to the fq_codel code in Linux git tree > to the latest updated version, available here: > https://kau.toke.dk/ietf/draft-ietf-aqm-fq-codel-06.html (or .txt).
I'm not huge on calling this reference [LINUX]. [LINUXSRC]? [SRC]? I also felt compelled, after this round of cite-adding, to add a few more cites, (what will be) rfc7806, BQL, HTB, and HFSC, with a brief section explaining why they are needed also. BQL was the under appreciated breakthrough that made scaling past a gbit possible, and would (if implemented) make dsl and cable modems a lot better, at their (much slower) speeds. https://github.com/dtaht/bufferbloat-rfcs/commit/7d500133008857b7b78000abac9d592e66477ffb adding: ## Device queues must also be well controlled It is best that these AQM and FQ algorithms run as close to the hardware as possible. Scheduling such complexity at interrupt time is difficult, so a small standing queue between the algorithm and the wire is often needed at higher transmit rates. In Linux, this is accomplished via "Byte Queue Limits" {{BQL}} in the device driver ring buffer (for physical line rates), and via a software rate limiter such as {HTB}}, {{HFSC}}, or {{CAKE}} otherwise. Other issues with concatenated queues are described in {{CODEL}}. ... There has been such an accumulation of small changes in response to this wonderful review process that I fear that going through another "last, last" call will be needed. > -Toke _______________________________________________ aqm mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm
