Re: [aqm] FQ-PIE kernel module implementation

["Bless, Roland (TM)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

Am 03.07.2015 um 12:16 schrieb Toke Høiland-Jørgensen:
> Polina Goltsman <[e-mail]> writes:
> 
>> As I understand the FQ-Codel draft, it seems to be fundamental to
>> FQ-Codel that each queue has separate state variables. So my question
>> is: is it indeed fundamental ?
> 
> I suppose that becomes a matter of semantics: What exactly do you mean
> by 'fundamental'. If you mean "an integral part of the current
> algorithm", then yes. If you mean "it's unthinkable to build a similar
> algorithm without the separate state variables" then no. I understand
> Fred's comment to take the second interpretation. :)

I guess Polina's point was:
it is a question how "similar" two realizations of PIE would be
if one applies PIE per flow like in FQ-Codel or alternatively
(as proposed by FQ-PIE) FQ first and then PIE working on the
aggregated queue.
Was it a deliberate choice for the latter and if so, why?
It would be good to document this difference to FQ-Codel explicitly.

Regards,
 Roland