| |||||||||||||
Bufferbloat: Dark Buffers in the Internet (ACM Queue)Bufferbloat: Dark Buffers in the Internet (ACM Queue)Posted Dec 7, 2011 11:44 UTC (Wed) by mtaht (✭ supporter ✭, #11087)In reply to: Bufferbloat: Dark Buffers in the Internet (ACM Queue) by dlang Parent article: Bufferbloat: Dark Buffers in the Internet (ACM Queue)
dlang: actually, all the work that has gone into making timestamping fast in the last decade seems to have paid off. Eric Dumazet proved to me that it is now incredibly cheap, and I think pursuing "time in queue" has great potential to get us into the sub 30ms range for inherent latencies across a wide range of gear.
I knew in my gut, too, that timestamping was expensive. It *was* - in the early 00s. My gut was wrong.
(Log in to post comments)
Milk algorithm? Posted Dec 7, 2011 18:20 UTC (Wed) by dmarti (subscriber, #11625) [Link] Isn't everyone independently coming up with the "milk algorithm?" Here's a carton of milk (packet) with a expiration date. Put it in your fridge (buffer). When you're ready to take it out, compare the expiration date to your current date. If it's not expired, drink it (send it). If it's expired, pour it out.
Milk algorithm? Posted Dec 8, 2011 9:49 UTC (Thu) by mtaht (✭ supporter ✭, #11087) [Link]
Heh. I'm glad there's prior art.
Bufferbloat: Dark Buffers in the Internet (ACM Queue) Posted Jan 2, 2012 10:23 UTC (Mon) by Randakar (guest, #27808) [Link]
Even if putting a timestamp on packets is too expensive for each individual packet, there are ways to mitigate that.
For example, a queue manager could put a magic timestamp packet in it's queue at periodic intervals. Say, 0.1 ms. (This number may need tuning..)
Every time a timestamp packet hits the front of the queue all packets behind it until the next timestamp marker will be at least (timestamp + something less than 1 interval) old. If that timestamp is too old you just drop the packets in the interval and move on.
Of course this solution isn't as good as individual timestamps - you can still get into situations where you're sending very old packets because there are too many packets in the intervals that you ARE processing - but I can imagine cases where this type of tradeoff may be worthwhile.
Bufferbloat: Dark Buffers in the Internet (ACM Queue) Posted Jan 3, 2012 13:01 UTC (Tue) by etienne (subscriber, #25256) [Link]
Or use 16 queues organised by received time to store packets, at some point queue (head) No 6 contains new packets currently arriving, it you are still sending packets from queue (tail) No 7 then throw away the whole queue No 7.
Next timeslot store new packets in queue No 7 and throw away queue No 8.
|
|||||||||||||