On 11/7/2016 11:05 AM, Josh Reynolds wrote:

Sorry, correction layer 4. TCP slow start and window sizing.

Allowing l2 to control your drops in a willy nilly fashion though is not a good idea... And random "pauses" on your backbone is also a poor idea.

The idea is to smooth out the flow end to end; it's the big bursts that cause trouble.

I'm of the opinion that WISP networks likely need to move to deep buffer data center switch designs, simply because of the number of variable speed links.



No, I prefer the opposite. Bufferbloat is bad! The math shows that you basically don't need a buffer bigger than 10 packets or so. But with QoS classmarking, you may need multiple buffers.

On Nov 7, 2016 9:53 AM, "Fred Goldstein" <f...@interisle.net <mailto:f...@interisle.net>> wrote:

    On 11/7/2016 10:40 AM, Josh Reynolds wrote:

    Negative, layer2 flow control is an axe when you need a scalpel.
    Turn it off everywhere!

    Layer3 has automatic mechanisms to help handle bandwidth
    saturation, and packet loss is part of that process. Furthermore,
    proper ToS/DSCP queueing is equally important.



    Well, technically no, Layer 3 has NO mechanisms to deal with
    capacity. It was a known issue among the network working group
    members in 1973 and a known issue in 1974 when TCP v1 was written,
    but the team had turned over by 1978 when TCP/IPv4 came out, and
    that group forgot about it until 1986 when things fell apart. The
    temporary short-term not very good fix was in layer 4 (TCP Slow
    Start) and that doesn't even apply to all streaming, though many
    do cooperate. Of course it was "good enough", so 30 years later it
    is taken as gospel. TCP/IP is the /chabuduo /of protocol stacks.

    There could be issues with using flow control on the Ethernet
    port, but really flow control should have been part of every
    layer. Loss should generally be localized.

    On Nov 7, 2016 9:36 AM, "Judd Dare" <judd.d...@gmail.com
    <mailto:judd.d...@gmail.com>> wrote:

        So you're saying, make sure Flow Control is enabled on the ports?

        On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 8:22 AM, Josh Reynolds
        <j...@kyneticwifi.com <mailto:j...@kyneticwifi.com>> wrote:

            Microbursts causing buffer drops on egress ports to
            non-10G capable destinations. The switch wants to send
            data at a rate faster than the 1G devices can take it in,
            so it has to buffer it's data on those ports. Eventually
            those buffers fill up, and it taildrops traffic. TCP flow
            control takes over and eventually slows the transfer rate
            by reducing window size. It doesn't matter if its only
            sending 100M of data, its the RATE that it is sending the
            data.


            On Nov 7, 2016 8:58 AM, "TJ Trout" <t...@voltbb.com
            <mailto:t...@voltbb.com>> wrote:

                I have a 10G switch that is switching everything of
                mine at my NOC, including peers, router wan, router
                lan, uplink to tower, etc

                During peak traffic periods ~2gbps I'm seeing 1%
                packet loss and throughput will drop to 0 for just a
                second and resume normal for a few minutes before
                dropping back to zero for just a second. doesn't seem
                to be affecting the wan side of my router which
                connects to peers through the same switch. Doesn't
                happen during the day with low periods of traffic.

                I've enabled / disabled STP, Flow control.

                I believe I've isolated it to not be a single port,
                possibly have a bad switch but that seems hard to
                believe...

                Port isn't flapping, getting small amounts of fcs
                errors on receive and lots of length errors but i
                think those shouldn't be a problem?

                It's an IBM G8124 10G switch

                Ideas?

                _______________________________________________
                Wireless mailing list
                Wireless@wispa.org <mailto:Wireless@wispa.org>
                http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
                <http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless>


            _______________________________________________
            Wireless mailing list
            Wireless@wispa.org <mailto:Wireless@wispa.org>
            http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
            <http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless>



        _______________________________________________
        Wireless mailing list
        Wireless@wispa.org <mailto:Wireless@wispa.org>
        http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
        <http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless>



    _______________________________________________
    Wireless mailing list
    Wireless@wispa.org <mailto:Wireless@wispa.org>
    http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
    <http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless>

-- Fred R. Goldstein k1io fred "at"interisle.net <http://interisle.net>
      Interisle Consulting Group
      +1 617 795 2701 <tel:%2B1%20617%20795%202701>

    _______________________________________________ Wireless mailing
    list Wireless@wispa.org <mailto:Wireless@wispa.org>
    http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
<http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless>
_______________________________________________
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

--
 Fred R. Goldstein      k1io    fred "at" interisle.net
 Interisle Consulting Group
 +1 617 795 2701

<<attachment: fred.vcf>>

_______________________________________________
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Reply via email to