> On 5 Feb, 2020, at 6:06 pm, Dave Taht <[email protected]> wrote: > >> D) "cobalt" is proving out better in several respects than pure >> codel, >> and folding in some of that makes sense, except I don't know which >> things are the most valuable considering wifi's other problems >> >> Reading paper now. Thanks for the pointer. > > I tend to think out that fq_codel is "good enough" in most > circumstances. The edge cases that cake handles better are a matter of a > few percentage points, vs orders of magnitude that we get with fq_codel > alone vs a vs a FIFO, and my focus of late has been to make things that > ate less cpu or were better offloadable than networked better. Others differ.
I think COBALT might be worth putting in, as it should have essentially no net cost and does behave a little better than stock Codel. It's better at handling unresponsive traffic, in particular. - Jonathan Morton _______________________________________________ Cake mailing list [email protected] https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake
