Re: [Cake] Cake latency update

> On Feb 10, 2017, at 12:35 PM, Sebastian Moeller wrote: > > Hi Pete, > >> On Feb 10, 2017, at 12:08, Pete Heist wrote: >> >> Not a problem. I’ll run a spread of Cake and fq_codel over Ethernet at >> various bandwidths. It will be through their Apple

Re: [Cake] Cake latency update

Hi Pete, > On Feb 10, 2017, at 12:08, Pete Heist wrote: > > >> On Feb 10, 2017, at 11:31 AM, Jonathan Morton wrote: >> >> >>> On 10 Feb, 2017, at 12:05, Pete Heist wrote: >>> >>> It means that both the ingress and egress

Re: [Cake] Cake latency update

> On Feb 10, 2017, at 11:31 AM, Jonathan Morton wrote: > > >> On 10 Feb, 2017, at 12:05, Pete Heist wrote: >> >> It means that both the ingress and egress have been redirected over the same >> IFB device and QoS'd together. > > Okay, I guessed as

Re: [Cake] Cake latency update

> On 10 Feb, 2017, at 12:05, Pete Heist wrote: > > It means that both the ingress and egress have been redirected over the same > IFB device and QoS'd together. Okay, I guessed as much but wanted to be sure. I can’t think of any theoretical reason for these results.

Re: [Cake] Cake latency update

> On 10 Feb, 2017, at 11:21, Pete Heist wrote: > > Here are the results at various bitrates (all half-duplex rate limiting on > this CPU). Hold on a minute. What does “half-duplex rate limiting” mean exactly? - Jonathan Morton

Re: [Cake] Cake latency update

> On Feb 10, 2017, at 9:49 AM, Jonathan Morton wrote: > > >> On 10 Feb, 2017, at 10:04, Pete Heist wrote: >> >> I look forward to the throughput shifts being solved, where I see results >> like this: >> >>