Re: [Cake] total download rate with many flows

I'm curious as to why you think Cobalt is more aggressive than Codel. It does use more accurate approximations to the mathematical ideal than the "reference" codel does. It is however very odd that the Diffserv mode has any effect on this at all. It could be explained if a lot of the traffic is

Re: [Cake] Cake upstream Planning

On Wed, Nov 15, 2017, at 21:19, Dave Taht wrote: > > > There’s also been a Cake support feature request hanging around in the > > EdgeOS > > forums for a while after Lochnair’s successful work to get it built for the > > EdgeRouter firmware: > > > >

Re: [Cake] total download rate with many flows

On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 8:04 PM, George Amanakis wrote: > The problem I am describing in this thread appears only when using > besteffort. If diffserv3 is used (without any further prioritization by > manipulating DSCP bits) downstream is more stable and higher in throughput

Re: [Cake] ack filter rrul result at 1000/100

Please disregard that result entirely, my test setup was wrong and I jumped for joy too early. (turned out on the second run I'd rate limited the wrong interface also to 100mbit) On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 7:13 PM, Dave Taht wrote: > I pulled together rmounce's patchset for

Re: [Cake] Cake upstream Planning

Mostly because of the Cavium and MediaTek SDKs yes. However in my quest to use a newer kernel I found that EdgeOS/Vyatta uses UnionFS which is not supported on newer kernels than 3.16, so that's gotta be fixed first too. In VyOS they've solved this by using UnionFS-Fuse. On Wed, Nov 15, 2017, at

Re: [Cake] Cake upstream Planning

> On Nov 15, 2017, at 9:28 PM, Nils Andreas Svee wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 15, 2017, at 21:19, Dave Taht wrote: >> >>> There’s also been a Cake support feature request hanging around in the >>> EdgeOS >>> forums for a while after Lochnair’s successful work to get it built for

Re: [Cake] Cake upstream Planning

Pete Heist writes: > On Nov 15, 2017, at 9:04 PM, Dave Taht wrote: > > > Dave Taht writes: > > TCP RTT ~= 8ms with default qdisc, throughput ~= 940 Mbit > TCP RTT ~= 4.5ms with ‘cake unlimited’,

Re: [Cake] Cake upstream Planning

> On Nov 15, 2017, at 9:04 PM, Dave Taht wrote: > > Dave Taht > writes: > >>> TCP RTT ~= 8ms with default qdisc, throughput ~= 940 Mbit >>> TCP RTT ~= 4.5ms with ‘cake unlimited’, throughput ~= 920 Mbit >>> TCP RTT ~= 1ms with ‘cake unlimited

Re: [Cake] Cake upstream Planning

Pete Heist writes: > On Nov 15, 2017, at 8:44 PM, Dave Taht wrote: > > > > I dearly would like to try and submit cake to mainline linux in > december. Getting it done is going to take group effort. > > And trying to cover all

Re: [Cake] Cake upstream Planning

> On Nov 15, 2017, at 8:44 PM, Dave Taht wrote: > > I dearly would like to try and submit cake to mainline linux in > december. Getting it done is going to take group effort. > > And trying to cover all the corner cases, is going to take co-ordination > and scripting, and

Re: [Cake] Cake upstream Planning

Dave Taht writes: >> >> TCP RTT ~= 8ms with default qdisc, throughput ~= 940 Mbit >> TCP RTT ~= 4.5ms with ‘cake unlimited’, throughput ~= 920 Mbit >> TCP RTT ~= 1ms with ‘cake unlimited lan’, throughput ~= 920 Mbit This was with BQL in play? Monitoring BQL's behavior might help.

[Cake] Cake upstream Planning

(note changed topic thread) I dearly would like to try and submit cake to mainline linux in december. Getting it done is going to take group effort. And trying to cover all the corner cases, is going to take co-ordination and scripting, and perhaps we should switch to google docs to pull

Re: [Cake] Donation

> On Nov 14, 2017, at 9:10 PM, Dave Taht wrote: > > Pete Heist > writes: > >> By the way, what or how much is needed to get Cake mainlined? > > I'd like us to give it a go when net-next reopens in two weeks, > we'd then have 6