On Fri, 12 Jun 2015, Daniel Havey wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 6:49 PM, David Lang wrote:
> >> On Wed, 10 Jun 2015, Daniel Havey wrote:
> >>
> >>> We know that (see Kathy and Van's paper) that AQM algorithms only work
> >>> when they are placed at the slowest queue. However, the AQM is pl
> On Fri, 12 Jun 2015, Benjamin Cronce wrote:
>
> >> On 12/06/15 02:44, David Lang wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 11 Jun 2015, Sebastian Moeller wrote:
> >>>
>
> On Jun 11, 2015, at 03:05 , Alan Jenkins
> wrote:
>
> > On 10/06/15 21:54, Sebastian Moeller wrote:
> >>
> > One s
On Fri, 12 Jun 2015, Daniel Havey wrote:
ii) Sebastian points out if you implement AQSM in the modem (as the paper
claims :p), you may as well BQL the modem drivers and run AQM. *But that
doesn't work on ingress* - ingress requires tbf/htb with a set rate - but
the achievable rate is lower in p
On Fri, 12 Jun 2015, Sebastian Moeller wrote:
Hi David,
On Jun 12, 2015, at 03:44 , David Lang wrote:
The problem shows up when either usage changes rapidly, or the network
operator is not keeping up with required upgrades as gradual usage changes
happen (including when they are prevented f
On Fri, 12 Jun 2015, Benjamin Cronce wrote:
On 12/06/15 02:44, David Lang wrote:
On Thu, 11 Jun 2015, Sebastian Moeller wrote:
On Jun 11, 2015, at 03:05 , Alan Jenkins
wrote:
On 10/06/15 21:54, Sebastian Moeller wrote:
One solution would be if ISPs made sure upload is 100% provisioned.
On Fri, 12 Jun 2015, Daniel Havey wrote:
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 6:49 PM, David Lang wrote:
On Wed, 10 Jun 2015, Daniel Havey wrote:
We know that (see Kathy and Van's paper) that AQM algorithms only work
when they are placed at the slowest queue. However, the AQM is placed
at the queue that
Sebastian Moeller wrote:
> Hi Alex,
>
> On Jun 12, 2015, at 20:51 , Alex Elsayed
> wrote:
>
>> Sebastian Moeller wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Benjamin,
>>>
>>> To go off onto a tangent:
>>>
>>> On Jun 12, 2015, at 06:45 , Benjamin Cronce
>>> wrote:
>>>
[...]
Under load while doing P2P(About
> Hi Jonathan,
>
> On June 12, 2015 9:14:02 PM GMT+02:00, Jonathan Morton wrote:
> >We have a test in Flent which tries to exercise this case: 50 flows in
one
> >direction and 1 in the other, all TCP. Where the 50 flows are on the
narrow
> >side of an asymmetric link, it is possible to see just wh
Hi Jonathan,
On June 12, 2015 9:14:02 PM GMT+02:00, Jonathan Morton
wrote:
>We have a test in Flent which tries to exercise this case: 50 flows in
>one
>direction and 1 in the other, all TCP. Where the 50 flows are on the
>narrow
>side of an asymmetric link, it is possible to see just what happe
Hi Alex,
On Jun 12, 2015, at 20:51 , Alex Elsayed wrote:
> Sebastian Moeller wrote:
>
>> Hi Benjamin,
>>
>> To go off onto a tangent:
>>
>> On Jun 12, 2015, at 06:45 , Benjamin Cronce
>> wrote:
>>
>>> [...]
>>> Under load while doing P2P(About 80Mb down and 20Mb up just as I started
>>> the
We have a test in Flent which tries to exercise this case: 50 flows in one
direction and 1 in the other, all TCP. Where the 50 flows are on the narrow
side of an asymmetric link, it is possible to see just what happens when
there isn't enough bandwidth for the acks of the single opposing flow.
Wha
Sebastian Moeller wrote:
> Hi Benjamin,
>
> To go off onto a tangent:
>
> On Jun 12, 2015, at 06:45 , Benjamin Cronce
> wrote:
>
>> [...]
>> Under load while doing P2P(About 80Mb down and 20Mb up just as I started
>> the test) HFSC: P2P in 20% queue and 80/443/8080 in 40% queue with ACKs
>> go
> Hi Benjamin,
>
> On Jun 12, 2015, at 17:33 , Benjamin Cronce wrote:
>
> > > On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 4:08 AM, Sebastian Moeller wrote:
> > > Hi Benjamin,
> > >
> > > To go off onto a tangent:
> > >
> > > On Jun 12, 2015, at 06:45 , Benjamin Cronce wrote:
> > >
> > > > [...]
> > > > Under load whi
On 12/06/15 15:35, Daniel Havey wrote:
On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 6:00 AM, Alan Jenkins
wrote:
On 12/06/15 02:44, David Lang wrote:
On Thu, 11 Jun 2015, Sebastian Moeller wrote:
On Jun 11, 2015, at 03:05 , Alan Jenkins
wrote:
On 10/06/15 21:54, Sebastian Moeller wrote:
One solution would be
Hi Benjamin,
On Jun 12, 2015, at 17:33 , Benjamin Cronce wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 4:08 AM, Sebastian Moeller wrote:
> > Hi Benjamin,
> >
> > To go off onto a tangent:
> >
> > On Jun 12, 2015, at 06:45 , Benjamin Cronce wrote:
> >
> > > [...]
> > > Under load while doing P2P(About 80
> On 12/06/15 02:44, David Lang wrote:
> > On Thu, 11 Jun 2015, Sebastian Moeller wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> On Jun 11, 2015, at 03:05 , Alan Jenkins
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 10/06/15 21:54, Sebastian Moeller wrote:
> > >>>
> >>> One solution would be if ISPs made sure upload is 100% provisioned.
> >>>
Hi Daniel,
On Jun 12, 2015, at 17:02 , Daniel Havey wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 12:27 AM, Sebastian Moeller wrote:
>> [...]
>>Except that DOCSIS 3.1 pie in the modem does not work that way. As I
>> understand
>> http://www.cablelabs.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/DOCSIS-AQM_May201
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 4:08 AM, Sebastian Moeller wrote:
> Hi Benjamin,
>
> To go off onto a tangent:
>
> On Jun 12, 2015, at 06:45 , Benjamin Cronce wrote:
>
> > [...]
> > Under load while doing P2P(About 80Mb down and 20Mb up just as I
started the test)
> > HFSC: P2P in 20% queue and 80/443/80
On 12/06/15 02:44, David Lang wrote:
On Thu, 11 Jun 2015, Sebastian Moeller wrote:
On Jun 11, 2015, at 03:05 , Alan Jenkins
wrote:
On 10/06/15 21:54, Sebastian Moeller wrote:
One solution would be if ISPs made sure upload is 100% provisioned.
Could be cheaper than for (the higher rate)
Hi David,
On Jun 12, 2015, at 03:44 , David Lang wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jun 2015, Sebastian Moeller wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jun 11, 2015, at 03:05 , Alan Jenkins
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/06/15 21:54, Sebastian Moeller wrote:
>>>
>>> One solution would be if ISPs made sure upload is 100% provisioned.
On 06/12/2015 03:44 AM, David Lang wrote:
On Thu, 11 Jun 2015, Sebastian Moeller wrote:
On Jun 11, 2015, at 03:05 , Alan Jenkins
wrote:
On 10/06/15 21:54, Sebastian Moeller wrote:
One solution would be if ISPs made sure upload is 100% provisioned.
Could be cheaper than for (the higher r
Hi Benjamin,
To go off onto a tangent:
On Jun 12, 2015, at 06:45 , Benjamin Cronce wrote:
> [...]
> Under load while doing P2P(About 80Mb down and 20Mb up just as I started the
> test)
> HFSC: P2P in 20% queue and 80/443/8080 in 40% queue with ACKs going to a 20%
> realtime queue
> http://www
22 matches
Mail list logo
