With 30Mbps, it is not obvious enough how adaptation affects different participants. As ue1 and ue2 do not have any common outgoing ports with ue3 along the paths from b and c, the path to ue1 and ue2 only transmits 60Mbps which does not show a really significant drop in either of their received data rates. It's a few Mbps on both sides that show up in the log but that is not much more than what is lost anyway due to the imperfect implementation of the bandwidth limiting solution.
With 40Mbps outgoing traffic, both ue1 and ue2 experience under 20Mbps incoming traffic sometimes which makes the effect obvious. Then, the slicing will show, ue2 have 25Mbps granted which is the whole point.
Default bandwidth must be updated in all experiments, not only in the baseline.
With 30Mbps, it is not obvious enough how adaptation affects different participants. As ue1 and ue2 do not have any common outgoing ports with ue3 along the paths from b and c, the path to ue1 and ue2 only transmits 60Mbps which does not show a really significant drop in either of their received data rates. It's a few Mbps on both sides that show up in the log but that is not much more than what is lost anyway due to the imperfect implementation of the bandwidth limiting solution.
With 40Mbps outgoing traffic, both ue1 and ue2 experience under 20Mbps incoming traffic sometimes which makes the effect obvious. Then, the slicing will show, ue2 have 25Mbps granted which is the whole point.
Default bandwidth must be updated in all experiments, not only in the baseline.