Dave,

thanks for asking - I'm not an NQB author, and my know-how on Linux QoS / Cake 
is fairly zero. Did you want to address Greg?

I myself am still struggling to understand how NQB operates. I understand the 
idea behind it, but questions on operation still remain.

NQB has been designed for AC_VI, not AC_VO. So aggregating it with other video 
related DSCPs may make sense. Greg's draft partially suggests other PHBs to 
forward NQB, I think. My main concern is that no flow should be able to starve 
off Best Effort by design. If the Linux Cake implementation does so, also if 
combined with WiFi scheduling, then I'm fine. If the result is, let's all mark 
all traffic by (e.g.) NQB as then we'll certainly seize more bandwidth than 
BE/default, we don't need NQB.

This is not to say, NQB does or will starve off BE/default. I'm however not 
sure, whether I understood operation of it completely and I think, draft text 
is insufficient or not precise. I saw and appreciate that precise flow 
definitions are part of the Linux/cake implementation. Draft NQB offers none at 
all.

Regards,

Ruediger 

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Dave Taht <dave.t...@gmail.com> 
Gesendet: Dienstag, 14. März 2023 15:02
An: Geib, Rüdiger <ruediger.g...@telekom.de>
Cc: Greg White <g.wh...@cablelabs.com>; tsvwg IETF list <ts...@ietf.org>; Cake 
List <cake@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Betreff: draft-ietf-tsvwg-nqb-15.txt vs the cake AQM

I have been sitting on the cake related patches for this for years now, and it 
is my hope to get support for NQB into the next linux release, regardless of 
whether it gets through last call at this time, unless the selected codepoint 
number changes. (?)

Cake (please see the man page here:
https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man8/tc-cake.8.html ) supports multiple 
diffserv models.

besteffort is exactly that, besteffort, and will not gain NQB support.

The diffserv3 interpretation is the default, and given that flow queuing 
handles most of the NQB-like problems naturally, and  Voice (CS7, CS6, EF, VA, 
TOS4) is all that is handled there today, I am thinking of *not* elevating NQB 
into that class is the right thing.

NQB fits nicely into the diffserv4 model in the video class, so I will put it 
there. since covid we tend to use the diffserv4 model a lot to manage 
videoconferencing better.

As for the CS0-CS7 precedence model inc cake, we have declared that obsolete in 
the code, and wherever NQB falls into it, great. And the diffserv8, I don´t 
know.

Anyway, does that work for everyone?

Part II of this would be a discussion of the various wash modes, but merely 
getting the right byte into the right lookup tables after all this discussion, 
would be nice.
_______________________________________________
Cake mailing list
Cake@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake

Reply via email to