On Tue, 2012-09-04 at 08:10 -0700, Nandita Dukkipati wrote: > The idea of using srtt as interval makes sense to me if alongside we > also hash flows with similar RTTs into same bucket. But with just the > change in interval, I am not sure how codel is expected to behave. > > My understanding is: the interval (usually set to worst case expected > RTT) is used to measure the standing queue or the "bad" queue. Suppose > 1ms and 100ms RTT flows get hashed to same bucket, then the interval > with this patch will flip flop between 1ms and 100ms. How is this > expected to measure a standing queue? In fact I think the 1ms flow may > land up measuring the burstiness or the "good" queue created by the > long RTT flows, and this isn't desirable. >
Well, how things settle with a pure codel, mixing flows of very different RTT then ? It seems there is a high resistance on SFQ/fq_codel model because of the probabilities of flows sharing a bucket. So what about removing the stochastic thing and switch to a hash with collision resolution ? _______________________________________________ Codel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/codel
