On 03/02/2015 09:43 AM, divya singla wrote:
please explain me this also:
how codel controls the delay like it drops the packet when it spends
more time than target and after that it will be retransmitted.
So in case of retransmission and all, i think delay should be more.
isn't it?
At the risk of typing beyond my understanding...
CoDel is expected to be deployed in situations where the maximum
possible queuing is rather large at a bottleneck link. Probably several
multiples of the RTT in time/size. It is a response to a belief that
throwing more and more memory at queues and holding that every packet is
sacred is a good thing. Consider what would/could happen with such
queues without CoDel and what that would mean to delay.
Next , How does UDP react like tcp adjusts its rate when there is
packet loss and UDP?
UDP doesn't. The *application* using UDP is expected too, just as
applications using UDP have been expected to do "the right things" from
the beginning.
rick jones
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 4:44 AM, Stephen Hemminger
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2015 19:32:58 +0100
"Richard Scheffenegger" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> Hi Members,
> i am doing M.tech and my research topic is AQM.
> i tried to run codel with ns-2.35.
> And i found packet loss is more in codel as compared to RED.
More packet loss is no necessarily a bad thing.
You need to measure throughput and latency together.
_______________________________________________
Codel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/codel
_______________________________________________
Codel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/codel
