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 > bl...@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 > _______________________________________________ Cake mailing list Cake@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake