Daniel Sterling <sterling.dan...@gmail.com> writes: > On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 11:14 AM Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <t...@toke.dk> wrote: >> It depends. A 'sparse' flow should get consistent priority > >> That's per flow. But you're misunderstanding the 100ms value. That's the >> 'interval', which is (simplifying a bit) the amount of time CAKE will >> wait until it reacts to a flow building a queue. > >> If a flow exceeds its fair share *rate*, >> it'll no longer (from CAKEs) PoV be a 'sparse flow', and it'll get the >> same treatment as all other flows (round-robin scheduling), and if it >> keeps sending at this higher rate, it'll keep being scheduled in this >> way. If the flow is non-elastic (i.e., doesn't slows down in response to >> packet drops), it'll self-congest and you'll see that as increased >> latency. > > Ah! Thank you *very* much for this explanation. I greatly appreciate > the effort everyone in this group puts into explaining (and tolerating > :) ) new users of cake. > > In my case: I am happy to report this is *not* a bug or an issue with > cake, as I originally thought. I am able to reproduce the issue I was > seeing (high ping times as reported by the xbox game's network > monitoring) w/o cake being in the mix at all. So this issue is either > with how I've configured / built openwrt, or with my wireless network > mesh, or with the xbox itself. It is NOT an issue with cake. > > Thank you all very much again. I will continue to use and test cake > and let you know if I encounter further issues with cake itself.
You're welcome! Happy experimenting :) -Toke _______________________________________________ Bloat mailing list Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat