[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20111207225747.GA4758@nuttenaction>
Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 23:57:48 +0100
From: Hagen Paul Pfeifer <hagen@...u.net>
To: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
Dave Taht <dave.taht@...il.com>,
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>,
Thomas Graf <tgraf@...radead.org>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Jim Gettys <jg@...edesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sch_red: fix red_change
* Ilpo Järvinen | 2011-12-05 13:42:44 [+0200]:
>I disagree. If there's any slow starting flow that alone can fill the
>bottleneck, anything significantly larger than RTT just harms. RED is
>just "too slow" if you follow the recommended parametrization..
>
>In a core router you can probably get away with multiple RTTs, but near
>edge that is a grave mistake due to how slow-start behaves. With average
>based on many RTTs, RED still estimates that the link has low load while
>congestion has escalated to higher dimensions due to slow start. As a
>result, RED graciously falls back to tail-drop once the physical queue
>runs out and the flows respond allowing the load to decrease. However,
>finally RED reaches a state where it starts to "pro-actively" react to an
>"incipient congestion"?!? :-/ => Problem is made worse by those extra
>drops/marks happening too late.
But then one question Ilpo: drive IW10 or IW14 the behavior even worse?
Especially if n connections start almost simultanously? You did some analysis
on this topic.
HGN
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists