From: don-lartc@isis.cs3-inc.com (Don Cohen)
To: lartc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Subject: Re: [LARTC] SFQ + RED
Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 17:54:31 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <marc-lartc-100774775817462@msgid-missing> (raw)
After an off-list discussion I think Martin now agrees with me that
sfq will not let one large flow deny service to all others.
It's actually the other way around, ensuring service to the small ones
even at the expense of the large ones.
> From: Martin Devera <devik@cdi.cz>
>
> IMHO the RED would be useful here. SFQ limits total packet count
> to 128 packets. So that one flow can simply fill whole SFQ leaving
> small space for other flows.
> I'm able to simulate it using one host generating huge UDP flow.
> All others flow goes away :(
>
> devik
>
> On Mon, 3 Dec 2001, Don Cohen wrote:
>
> >
> > > On Tue, Nov 27, 2001 at 11:53:10AM -0500, Michael T. Babcock wrote:
> > > > I've asked this before, but does anyone feel technically inclined
> > > > enough to try swapping in a RED queue for the per-bucket queuing done
> > > > by SFQ? If SFQ builds a series of 'sessions' to be given fair use of
> > > > available bandwidth, using RED to slow down those that are building up
> > > > too fast would smooth things out.
> >
> > I don't think this is necessary. As it is now, when you enqueue a
> > packet in a full SFQ queue it drops from the tail of the longest
> > subqueue. If you have substantial competition for the link then
> > your subqueue won't be allowed to grow very long to begin with.
> > The random variation in demand from other flows will have the effect
> > of jittering the maximum length of your subqueue, which is pretty
> > similar to what you experience with RED, isn't it?
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://ds9a.nl/2.4Routing/
next reply other threads:[~2001-12-07 17:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-12-07 17:54 Don Cohen [this message]
2001-12-07 22:28 ` Subject: Re: [LARTC] SFQ + RED Martin Devera
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=marc-lartc-100774775817462@msgid-missing \
--to=don-lartc@isis.cs3-inc.com \
--cc=lartc@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox