Eugene Grosbein wrote:
On Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 12:04:46PM +0200, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
The goal is to make sources of traffic to slow down, this is the only
way to descrease drops - any finite queue may be overhelmed with traffic.
Taildrop does not really help with this. GRED does much better.
i think the first problem here is figure out _why_ we have
the drops, as the original poster said that queues are configured
with a very large amount of buffer (and i think there is a
misconfiguration somewhere because the mbuf stats do not make
sense)
That may be very simple, f.e. wide uplink channel and policy that
dictates slower client speeds. Any taildrop queue would drop lots
of packets.
If uplink is e.g. 100 mbit/s, but data is fed to client by dummynet at 1
mbit/s, doesn't the _client's_ TCP software know to slow things down to
not overwhelm 1 mbit/s? Where has TCP slow-start gone? My router box
isn't some application proxy that starts downloading at full 100 mbit/s
thus quickly filling client's 1 mbit/s link. It's just a router.
Although it doesn't yet make sense to me, I'll try going to GRED soon.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
