Hi Erik,
> On Oct 10, 2022, at 13:46, Taraldsen Erik <erik.tarald...@telenor.no> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 10/10/2022, 11:41, "Bloat on behalf of Sebastian Moeller via Bloat"
> <bloat-boun...@lists.bufferbloat.net on behalf of
> bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
>
> [SM] Cool, if I might ask what fraction of the sync are you setting the
> traffic shaper for and are you doing fine grained overhead accounting (or
> simply fold that into a grand "de-rating"-factor)?
>
> We ended up just using a fraction.
[SM] Fair enough, for ATM/AAL5 that is challenging but for VDSL2/PTM
that seems workable...
> Can't remember the exact fraction, but we were not conservative. It was hard
> to push through this change so leaving any bw on the table was sacrilegious
> to a lot of people.
[SM] Tricky... e.g. vectoring enabled CPE can be instructed by the
DSLAM to send error samples in-band with the data, but that traffic is never
seen by our shapers, so to account for that we need to set a fraction that
allows for that (more or less) periodic traffic. I guess one can reach a point
of "goog enough" even when ignoring such eventualities, especially if having to
convince through-put hot-rodders. Always interesting to hear experience from
the real world, thanks!
Regards
Sebastian
>
>
>
> -Erik
>
_______________________________________________
Bloat mailing list
Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
