This is really fascinating reading. The following made me stop for a second, though:
"The bucket is typically full at connection startup so BBR learns the underlying network's BtlBw, but once the bucket empties, all packets sent faster than the (much lower than BtlBw) bucket fill rate are dropped. BBR eventually learns this new delivery rate, but the ProbeBW gain cycle results in continuous moderate losses. To minimize the upstream bandwidth waste and application latency increase from these losses, we added policer detection and an explicit policer model to BBR." So, how is this likely to be playing with our qos_scripts and with cake? Given we have people from both Google and qos_scripts/cake development here, do we need to compare some notes on how these interact? Are there settings in the HTB setup used by qos_scripts that will make it play more nicely with BBR (smaller quantums, smaller burst sizes, etc)? -Aaron On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 7:52 AM, Dave Taht <dave.t...@gmail.com> wrote: > http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=3022184 > > -- > Dave Täht > Let's go make home routers and wifi faster! With better software! > http://blog.cerowrt.org > _______________________________________________ > Bloat mailing list > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat >
_______________________________________________ Bloat mailing list Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
