Thanks for testing Pete! The unfairness you see occurs if you shape ingress using ifb on the same interface you shape egress, right? Sounds puzzling to me, and I don't have an explanation right now.
On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 6:55 AM Pete Heist <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Mar 1, 2019, at 12:01 PM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <[email protected]> wrote: > > Pete Heist <[email protected]> writes: > > That said, unless there’s an obvious reason for this that’s fixable, > I’m fine with how it is, considering the improvement. :) > > > Cool! And you haven't seen any regressions in other usage? :) > > > To be honest, today’s the first time I tried it and I haven’t done any > testing on it beyond fairness. (So, ship it!) > > At least, I haven’t seen any other problems in this one-armed routing > scenario or a regular host to host scenario. > > Host fairness seems “mostly good" no matter what values I choose for the > number of flows of the four clients, flow fairness still looks good, and I > don’t see any problems starting and stopping different numbers of flows > mid-test. > > Pete > > _______________________________________________ > Cake mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake _______________________________________________ Cake mailing list [email protected] https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake
