From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@diku.dk>
To: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@medozas.de>
Cc: Netfilter Developer Mailing List
<netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org>,
netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: IPTV buffering
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 17:24:23 +0100 (CET) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1012211634330.21593@ask.diku.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101216111843.88E16F0C32AB5@borg.medozas.de>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: TEXT/PLAIN, Size: 2538 bytes --]
On Thu, 16 Dec 2010, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> On Thursday 2010-12-16 10:57, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
>
>> [...] NetConf 2010, see:
>>
>> http://vger.kernel.org/netconf2010.html
>
> I just went over a few slide sets, and noticed Dave's Netfilter summary
> about your IPTV talk, enlisting the point
>
> * Ethernet switches buffer too small
>
> ("too small".. "too few"?) Given the recent uproar about bufferbloat in
> routing devices (see LWN coverage about Getty's articles), wanting
> larger buffers seems to almost contradict what Getty would like.
Always wanting small buffers doesn't make sense. It seem that he is not
considering that network equipment can be used for other things than
TCP/IP.
What I want is a *smooth* IPTV multicast signal (which thus consumes
minimal buffer space), but because the streamers are bursting packets, I
want large enough buffers in the switch, to handle these bursts.
What I recommend (in the backbone) is to increase the buffer size in the
QoS queue, which is used for e.g. IPTV/multicast. And have another queue
for the normal Internet traffic (because too large buffers can cause
issues).
> Though TV is usually delivered via UDP rather than TCP, some of the
> protocols may too implement some sort of congestion recognition or
> even avoidance technique ÿÿ IIRC realplayer had something that
> adapted video quality based upon transfer rate.
Our TV streamer send out a MULTICAST signal, thus there is NOT any
congestion feedback...
> Wanting more buffers vs. wanting less buffering seems to be quite
> contradictory. Jesper, what is your take on this?
Skimming through Getty's blog post, I think Getty has actually missed what
is happening. He should read my masters thesis[1]... The real problem is
that TCP/IP is clocked by the ACK packets, and on asymetric links (like
ADSL and DOCSIS), the ACK packets are simply comming downstream too fast
on the larger downstream link, resulting in bursts and high-latency on the
upstream link.
With the ADSL-optimizer I actually solved Gettys problem, but I guess the
real solution would be to implement a TCP algorithm which handels this
asymmtry, and e.g. isn't based on the ACK feedback...
[1] http://www.adsl-optimizer.dk/thesis/
Cheers,
Jesper Brouer
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------
MSc. Master of Computer Science
Dept. of Computer Science, University of Copenhagen
Author of http://www.adsl-optimizer.dk
-------------------------------------------------------------------
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-12-21 16:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-12-16 11:18 IPTV buffering Jan Engelhardt
2010-12-21 16:24 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer [this message]
2010-12-30 14:53 ` Buffer-bloat (was Re: IPTV buffering) Jesper Dangaard Brouer
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=Pine.LNX.4.64.1012211634330.21593@ask.diku.dk \
--to=hawk@diku.dk \
--cc=jengelh@medozas.de \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netfilter-devel@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).