nanog mailing list archives
Re: symmetric vs. asymmetric [was: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality]
From: Dave Taht <dave.taht () gmail com>
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2015 08:56:00 -0800
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 8:39 AM, Nick Hilliard <nick () foobar org> wrote:
On 04/03/2015 16:26, Dave Taht wrote:A geeky household with dad doing skype, mom uploading to facebook, a kid doing a game, and another kid doing netflix, however, is common. And, it is truly amazing how many households have more than one device per person nowadays.and $kid running a bittorrent hub, maxing out bandwidth in both directions.
Honestly, if you dramatically improve uplink and downlink latencies by adopting fair queueing + aqm on the cpe and headend - even bittorrent becomes a lot less of a problem. Home networks get slower, but not unusable. Really thorough paper on this: http://perso.telecom-paristech.fr/~drossi/paper/rossi14comnet-b.pdf While I do have some detailed data on torrent's behavior under fq_codel now, I haven't got it together enough to publish, (the above work is lagging behind). These days I basically just say that stuff in IW10 slow start (e.g. web traffic) punches (bittorrent) uTP traffic (no IW10) aside, the FQ bits in fq_codel make everything else work pretty well on low rate traffic like videoconferencing/voip/dns/web in general, the aqm bits keep overall queue links low on any fat flows, and the only major problem remain is torrent using IW10 over tcp inadvertently while competing with other single stream download/upload traffic. You get your edge device configured right, and you're golden, no matter how many darn geeky kids you have. http://burntchrome.blogspot.com/2014_05_01_archive.html Admittedly a little classification can help, on torrent, and I certainly regard the default number of peers (6-50) to be a bit much. You don't need to "just believe" me, please feel free to try what is in openwrt barrier breaker and chaos calmer. I never notice what the kids are doing on my link anymore, nor do they notice me.
Nick
-- Dave Täht Let's make wifi fast, less jittery and reliable again! https://plus.google.com/u/0/107942175615993706558/posts/TVX3o84jjmb
Current thread:
- Re: symmetric vs. asymmetric [was: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality], (continued)
- Re: symmetric vs. asymmetric [was: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality] Scott Helms (Mar 03)
- Re: symmetric vs. asymmetric [was: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality] Tei (Mar 03)
- Re: symmetric vs. asymmetric [was: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality] Mark Andrews (Mar 03)
- RE: symmetric vs. asymmetric [was: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality] Frank Bulk (Mar 06)
- Re: symmetric vs. asymmetric [was: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality] James R Cutler (Mar 07)
- Re: symmetric vs. asymmetric [was: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality] Lamar Owen (Mar 04)
- Re: symmetric vs. asymmetric [was: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality] Dave Taht (Mar 04)
- Re: symmetric vs. asymmetric [was: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality] Jack Bates (Mar 03)
- Re: symmetric vs. asymmetric [was: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality] Dave Taht (Mar 04)
- Re: symmetric vs. asymmetric [was: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality] Nick Hilliard (Mar 04)
- Re: symmetric vs. asymmetric [was: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality] Dave Taht (Mar 04)