As the question asks.......
What is the point at which losing fastrack and throughput is worth it, vis-a-vis tackling bufferbloat??? ( queueing actually not required )
Re: TO CAKE OR IS IT BLOAT [SOLVED]
Bufferbloat is when a particular link is saturated and additional traffic wishes to traverse the saturated link and instead of traversing it smoothly those packets/connections are subject to higher latency and more re-transmits as either the router or networking devices attempt to queue and buffer the packets or simply drop them (causing re-transmits). Bufferbloat is only relevant during periods of congestion, if your link is not saturated then there is no need for packet buffering and therefore you will not have any bufferbloat. As such the easiest solution to bufferbloat is to properly size your link for your desired workload.
Some other artificial situations where bufferbloat can occur relate to the processing speed of the packets going through the network devices in the path to your desired destination. If the physical link is 10GB/s but network device B (path A -> B -> C) can only process packets at 2GB/s then your link is effectively saturated once it hits 2GB/s even though the actual link speed is 10GB/s and bufferbloat or worse dropped packets will occur. The solution here is to pick a router or set of networking devices that have enough resources/power to handle the pps (packets per second) that need to be processed for your desired workload.
At the end of the day it boils down to either you are routing traffic from a 10 lane highway through a suburban road or there is only 1 border patrol agent working on the 10 lane highway. Simple solutions to those problems exist. In my opinion it is never reasonable to use queues for anything but intentionally limiting or shaping traffic as part of a paid allocation or equal sharing situation.
Some other artificial situations where bufferbloat can occur relate to the processing speed of the packets going through the network devices in the path to your desired destination. If the physical link is 10GB/s but network device B (path A -> B -> C) can only process packets at 2GB/s then your link is effectively saturated once it hits 2GB/s even though the actual link speed is 10GB/s and bufferbloat or worse dropped packets will occur. The solution here is to pick a router or set of networking devices that have enough resources/power to handle the pps (packets per second) that need to be processed for your desired workload.
At the end of the day it boils down to either you are routing traffic from a 10 lane highway through a suburban road or there is only 1 border patrol agent working on the 10 lane highway. Simple solutions to those problems exist. In my opinion it is never reasonable to use queues for anything but intentionally limiting or shaping traffic as part of a paid allocation or equal sharing situation.
Re: TO CAKE OR IS IT BLOAT
So, if I get that right...
If I'm stuck with 25/5 VDSL line and saturation of that link is common, everyday, issue then it actually make sense to use CAKE? I tend to play games, so I prefer lower latency and I'm constatly "fighting" over the line with teenage daughter...
This seems to me as overall solution so I don't have to fiddle with various ports etc...
@anav, first I had the issue and then I discovered that it has name
If I'm stuck with 25/5 VDSL line and saturation of that link is common, everyday, issue then it actually make sense to use CAKE? I tend to play games, so I prefer lower latency and I'm constatly "fighting" over the line with teenage daughter...
This seems to me as overall solution so I don't have to fiddle with various ports etc...
@anav, first I had the issue and then I discovered that it has name
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 10 guests