>>> I think I agree with Juliusz here, I'd prefer Babel stay truthful and >>> instead change how fq_codel reacts to it.
>> Yeah, perhaps fq_codel is not tolerant enough of bursts of packets. > Heh, I'm not sure there's a proper response to a large burst of > back-to-back packets that won't suck for all other traffic... I'm not a specialist, but my uneducated intuition would be that fq_codel can be tuned less agressively than plain codel -- the FQ element will prevent undue delay for unrelated flows. Which doesn't mean we shouldn't tune babeld (and BIRD) to generate traffic that's less bursty. But first, I need to understand fq_codel's behaviour better; I've got an experimental setup in mind, but it's pretty low on my to-do list right now. _______________________________________________ Babel-users mailing list [email protected] https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/babel-users
