Recent Features
| |||||||||||||
The CoDel queue management algorithmThe CoDel queue management algorithmPosted Jun 29, 2012 11:34 UTC (Fri) by Lennie (subscriber, #49641)In reply to: The CoDel queue management algorithm by slashdot Parent article: The CoDel queue management algorithm
I was thinking about this again, but it is only the slowest link that will need to buffer. And possibly some congested links.
If they are all congested links, your gaming would suffer anyway, because the alternative to your packets getting buffered is that they get dropped.
So if every link is congested, you'd loose a lot of the packets anyway.
(Log in to post comments)
The CoDel queue management algorithm Posted Jun 30, 2012 8:43 UTC (Sat) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313) [Link]
There are many cases where packets getting dropped _is_ better than packets getting buffered.
One really popular application where this is true is your telephone. The phone system backbone has been digital for years (ATM was invented specifically for phone use), and with real-time audio you really do want to have packets dropped if you can't keep up rather than buffering and falling behind.
The CoDel queue management algorithm Posted Jun 30, 2012 11:38 UTC (Sat) by Lennie (subscriber, #49641) [Link]
I'm not saying that it's bad that the packets get droppped, actually I totally agree.
TCP was designed around the idea that packets get dropped (and in a timely fashion ! that is what the bufferbloat problem is all about after all).
|
|||||||||||||