Re: [Bloat] ipv6 fe80:: addresses, vlans and bridges... borked?

2011-05-09 Thread Fred Baker
On May 8, 2011, at 8:26 PM, Dave Taht wrote: > Is there a standard for renaming fe80:: addresses to represent they are > interfacing with different vlans? well, yes. Link-local addresses (FE80::/10) areas you say interpreted only in the LAN in question. The usual approach is to give the LAN a

Re: [Bloat] No ECN marking in IPv6 linux

2011-05-09 Thread Lars Eggert
On 2011-5-6, at 21:18, Jonathan Morton wrote: > On 6 May, 2011, at 9:14 pm, Dave Taht wrote: > >> I am curious as to what the correct behavior here should be for encapsulated >> (6in4, 6to4, teredo) packets, and if this functionality was also borked. I >> was under the impression that for encaps

Re: [Bloat] ipv6 fe80:: addresses, vlans and bridges... borked?

2011-05-09 Thread Roland Bless
Hi Dave, On 09.05.2011 05:26, Dave Taht wrote: > I am modestly stumped as to how to solve this properly. I think it's > been causing problems with ipv6 for a long time, but I could be wrong. > > see http://www.bufferbloat.net/issues/126 > > Basically although the underlying interfaces do have un

Re: [Bloat] ipv6 fe80:: addresses, vlans and bridges... borked?

2011-05-09 Thread Dave Taht
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 2:14 AM, Fred Baker wrote: > > On May 8, 2011, at 8:26 PM, Dave Taht wrote: > > > Is there a standard for renaming fe80:: addresses to represent they are > interfacing with different vlans? > > well, yes. Link-local addresses (FE80::/10) areas you say interpreted only > in

Re: [Bloat] ipv6 fe80:: addresses, vlans and bridges... borked?

2011-05-09 Thread Fred Baker
On May 9, 2011, at 7:59 AM, Dave Taht wrote: > On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 2:14 AM, Fred Baker wrote: > > On May 8, 2011, at 8:26 PM, Dave Taht wrote: >> > Is there a standard for renaming fe80:: addresses to represent they are >> > interfacing with different vlans? >> >> well, yes. Link-local addr

Re: [Bloat] ipv6 fe80:: addresses, vlans and bridges... borked?

2011-05-09 Thread Dave Taht
Fred/all See http://www.bufferbloat.net/issues/126 which has a ip -6 addr and ifconfig dump and see if that "seems right" to you. On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Fred Baker wrote: > > On May 9, 2011, at 7:59 AM, Dave Taht wrote: > > On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 2:14 AM, Fred Baker wrote: > > > >

Re: [Bloat] ipv6 fe80:: addresses, vlans and bridges... borked?

2011-05-09 Thread Fred Baker
BTW, every time I post nowadays, I get moderated on bismark-devel. Do you think you could grandfather bloat@ emails? On May 9, 2011, at 9:14 AM, Dave Taht wrote: > Fred/all > > See > > http://www.bufferbloat.net/issues/126 > > which has a ip -6 addr and ifconfig dump > > and see if that "see

Re: [Bloat] Burst Loss

2011-05-09 Thread Rick Jones
On Sun, 2011-05-08 at 14:42 +0200, Richard Scheffenegger wrote: > I'm not an expert in TSO / GSO, and NIC driver design, but what I gathered > is, that with these schemes, and mordern NICs that do scatter/gather DMA of > dotzends of "independent" header/data chuncks directly from memory, the NIC

[Bloat] Some mqprio documentation

2011-05-09 Thread Dave Taht
There's a new qdisc on the block. Here's some documentation on how it works. -- Forwarded message -- From: John Fastabend Date: Mon, May 9, 2011 at 11:22 AM Subject: Re: trying to wrap my head around mqprio To: Dave Taht On 5/8/2011 12:49 AM, Dave Taht wrote: > I just finished

Re: [Bloat] ipv6 fe80:: addresses, vlans and bridges... borked?

2011-05-09 Thread Dave Taht
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 10:44 AM, Fred Baker wrote: > BTW, every time I post nowadays, I get moderated on bismark-devel. Do you > think you could grandfather bloat@ emails? > > I've added you to the bismark-devel list and set nomail on. > On May 9, 2011, at 9:14 AM, Dave Taht wrote: > > Fred/all