Looking at tc-adv, I would recommend to use “rtt 50” (maybe it is “rtt 50ms”) which allows to directly explicitly request a new “interval” (which IIRC is corresponding to the time you allow for the TCP control loop to react to cake’s ecn-marking/dropping) “target’ will be calculated as 5% of the explicit interval, in accordance with the rationale in the codel RFC.
Best Regards > On Feb 26, 2017, at 15:34, Andy Furniss <[email protected]> wrote: > > Jonathan Morton wrote: >> >>> On 26 Feb, 2017, at 15:16, Andy Furniss <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Is there any way or plans to allow users to relax slightly the target? >> >> You can do that by selecting a higher assumed RTT, for instance with the >> “oceanic” or “satellite” keywords. This also increases the interval, which >> makes the AQM less aggressive in general. > > Ok, thanks, I'll try. > > I didn't know what the implications of "lying" about RTT were. > > I do know that on a 60mbit ingress test I did to london = 10ms away, when I > tried using metro = 10ms I killed single threaded throughput, so was > wary of changing defaults after that. > > > _______________________________________________ > Cake mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake _______________________________________________ Cake mailing list [email protected] https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake
