• 0 Votes
    4 Posts
    991 Views
    stephenw10S

    Hmm, I'm not sure how to show that per interface. Possibly some combination of netstat -i and netstat -Q

  • Queue Management Algorithms Differences

    Traffic Shaping
    2
    4 Votes
    2 Posts
    4k Views
    D

    @jonathanlee Thank you very much for this attempt. I am personally very graphically untalented, but very responsive to good graphs. If ever you have a chance to give this a go again, to revisit and re-use your first tail drop diagram in contrast with codel alone - codel drops from the head of the queue, not the tail, and I would perhaps draw a 5ms target window at the same 4 packets you use here and feature a few more packet slots as a shock absorber. then three phases

    queue over target showing timestamps shock absorber filling -> dropping from head when too old queue below or at target

    I have NEVER managed to describe how codel operates well enough to suit me, and fq_codel, or for that matter, cake, oh, man...

    https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/bloat/2013-February/004888.html

    To try and describe how fq-codel works, I would use a single queue on the front left there with different colors for packets and their bunches. I do things like

    AAAAAABBFBBEAAAFEAAACAAA ->

    And coming out:

    BABAABFA BCEFCA

    Which is kind of accurate for a per packet FQ system, but DRR is different and having the longer blobs to represent bytes rather than packets might help.

    Does that help any?

  • 0 Votes
    7 Posts
    1k Views
    A

    @ibbetsion

    You must have something stuck in there somewhere. I just looked on a spare pfsense box I've got, with no traffic shaping setup at all, and this is the result I see in Diagnostics->Limiter Info

    Limiters: No limiters were found on this system.