[this message off list - feel free to forward it, but leave out my address]
I wanted to see where from a slot the packets got dropped when the queue was full. (e)sfq drops from the longest slot to make space for an incoming packet, so it's not tail drop as such, but the results show me it does drop from the tail of the slot - which if you are trying to shape inbound, is a PITA as tcp "slow" start grows exponentially and What's PITA ?
Pain in the arse.
overflows into my ISP/telecos buffer, causing a latency bump. I think it would be alot nicer if It head dropped to make the sender go into congestion control quicker.
The fact that the queue grows means that the packets are delayed, and that's supposed to influence the speed of tcp.
Yes but as I understsnd it during slow start the senders cwin doubles per rtt and doesn't stop until it's sent enough to fill my advertised window (which linux grows to 32k quite quickly) or a packet is lost and three dup acks are recieved, at which time it goes into congestion controll and shrinks it's cwin.
Head drop seems absurd, since most of the packets behind the dropped packet will be wasted - the tcp on the other side will only keep a few packets past the one that's missing.
I think the opposite is the case, the fact the packet is tail dropped means I don't start sending dups for the time it takes to get to the head of the queue. The sender meanwhile is transmitting alot of packets, most of which I drop after they have already used up some of my bandwidth.
I noticed that the packets were being released in pairs, which probably doesn't help either. I don't see that it should hurt.
The sender during slow start is increasing exponentally per ack recieved, it would be nicer to space them out.
How big are the packets? Are there other packets in other buckets or in other queues? Also how are the packets being generated? I'd expect for something like ftp where you generate a steady stream of large packets, they would be released one at a time, since your quantum is approx the size of one large packet. On the other hand if you generate two small packets at a time then maybe the queue is not the bottleneck. It could also be something in the device driver. You can probably solve this problem by adding printk's to tell you when various things happen.
This was a test - the packets are big and there is no other traffic. I am in the early days of experimenting. In real use I would be using something based on alexander clouters jdg-script with his RED settings - but even if I throttle to 65% down, with my "low" bandwidth, running a bittorrent - or just browsing heavy jpg sites will baulk my latency too much to play half life. Though most users may be quite happy with the results. Whatever queue I use for downstream is having to live behind a fifo whose bandwidth isn't that much more than what I would like to shape to, so may not behave as the text book says. If I had 2M down, I would not have a problem - what is a 300ms bump would only be 50ms and I could live with that.
Andy.
_______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
