> On 12 Apr, 2018, at 9:46 am, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
>
> I sent this to tsvwg where we're discussing the LE codepoint. Since I am now
> talking queue settings, I thought it might be interesting to get feedback
> from this group as well on what advice we should give operators.
>
> Please ta
On Thu, 12 Apr 2018, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
I am also going to test a 3 queue setup, where each of these groups of
DSCP values would go into different queues where LE would perhaps be
assured 5% of BW and the rest split evenly between a BE and "everything
else" queue. If I did that, I would
> On 12 Apr, 2018, at 2:23 pm, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
>
> Again, I'm aiming to write up something about this for people to take to
> replace their overbuffered FIFOs they might have towards customers today, not
> produce something that is wonderfully great, but not widely supported in
> cur
On Thu, 12 Apr 2018, Jonathan Morton wrote:
Yes, and that's a policy I can support (as far as it goes). I'd much
rather have, say, 100ms of bloat than 45000ms (which I've previously
encountered).
So after some more testing I discovered I kind of need:
class mikabr-LE
random-detect 50 ms 1
