The problem of bufferbloat arises due to the presence of large unmanaged buffers and leads to high queuing delays and significant degradation in the performance of time-sensitive and interactive Internet applications. Recently, a new smart queue management system called Common Applications Kept Enhanced (CAKE) has been introduced in Linux 4.19 to tackle the problem of bufferbloat in home Internet gateways. One of the integral parts of CAKE system is COBALT (CoDel and BLUE Alternate), a queue discipline which is a combination of Controlled Delay (CoDel) and BLUE algorithms. Although CAKE is a part of the Linux kernel, a detailed discussion on the design of COBALT is missing. In this paper, we discuss the design of COBALT and compare its performance with CoDel. Additionally, we propose a simulation model for COBALT in ns-3 and test its correctness by comparing the results obtained from it to those obtained from the Linux model. Our evaluation shows that COBALT offers substantial benefits in terms of curtailing queue delays when unresponsive flows exist.

The last several years has seen a renewed interest in smart queue management to curb excessive network queueing delay, as people have realised the prevalence of bufferbloat in real networks. However, for an effective deployment at today's last mile connections, an improved queueing algorithm is not enough in itself, as often the bottleneck queue is situated in legacy systems that cannot be upgraded. In addition, features such as per-user fairness and the ability to de-prioritise background traffic are often desirable in a home gateway.In this paper we present Common Applications Kept Enhanced (CAKE), a comprehensive network queue management system designed specifically for home Internet gateways. CAKE packs several compelling features into an integrated solution, thus easing deployment. These features include: bandwidth shaping with overhead compensation for various link layers; reasonable DiffServ handling; improved flow hashing with both per-flow and per-host queueing fairness; and filtering of TCP ACKs. Our evaluation shows that these features offer compelling advantages, and that CAKE has the potential to significantly improve performance of last-mile internet connections.

Nowadays, due to excessive queuing, delays on the Internet can grow longer than the round trip time between the Moon and the Earth – for which the “bufferbloat” term was recently coined. Some point to active queue management (AQM) as the solution. Others propose end-to-end low-priority congestion control techniques (LPCC). Under both approaches, promising advances have been made in recent times: notable examples are CoDel for AQM, and LEDBAT for LPCC. In this paper, we warn of a potentially fateful interaction when AQM and LPCC techniques are combined: namely, AQM resets the relative level of priority between best-effort and low-priority congestion control protocols. We validate the generality of our findings by an extended set of experiments with packet-level ns2 simulation, considering 5 AQM techniques and 3 LPCC protocols, and carry on a thorough sensitivity analysis varying several parameters of the networking scenario. We complete the simulation via an experimental campaign conducted on both controlled testbeds and on the Internet, confirming the reprioritization issue to hold in the real world at least under all combination of AQM policies and LPCC protocols available in the Linux kernel. To promote cross-comparison, we make our scripts and dataset available to the research community.

Nowadays, due to excessive queuing, delays on the Internet can grow longer than several round trips between the Moon and the Earth - for which the “bufferbloat” term was recently coined. Some point to active queue management (AQM) as the solution. Others propose end-to-end low-priority congestion control techniques (LPCC). Under both approaches, promising advances have been made in recent times: notable examples are CoDel for AQM, and LEDBAT for LPCC. In this paper, we warn of a potentially fateful interaction when AQM and LPCC techniques are combined: namely (i) AQM resets the relative level of priority between best effort and low-priority congestion control protocols; (ii) while reprioritization generally equalizes the priority of LPCC and TCP, we also find that some AQM settings may actually lead best effort TCP to starvation. By an extended set of experiments conducted on both controlled testbeds and on the Internet, we show the problem to hold in the real world for all tested combination of AQM policies and LPCC protocols. To further validate the generality of our findings, we complement our experiments with packet-level simulation, to cover cases of other popular AQM and LPCC that are not available in the Linux kernel. To promote cross-comparison, we make our scripts and dataset available to the research community.