From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-01-iad.dyndns.com (mxout-128-iad.mailhop.org [216.146.32.128]) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9322A2E015C for ; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 00:35:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scan-02-iad.mailhop.org (scan-02-iad.local [10.150.0.207]) by mail-01-iad.dyndns.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20E7C6F514 for ; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 07:35:32 +0000 (UTC) X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) X-Mail-Handler: MailHop by DynDNS X-Originating-IP: 209.85.215.171 Received: from mail-ey0-f171.google.com (mail-ey0-f171.google.com [209.85.215.171]) by mail-01-iad.dyndns.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A22796F508 for ; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 07:35:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: by eydd26 with SMTP id d26so2086250eyd.16 for ; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 00:35:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:subject:mime-version:content-type:from :in-reply-to:date:cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references :to:x-mailer; bh=VNYvQvdww+3bnIZqDjjRx14r644zelWfWM6yISINzwc=; b=TqvIHsIKt7/f4Boj6CXc0JxfLGDZwCMpTaV4lz51/otbMi7MYIZ4VIWEy7+Jn+EFbj AdKJMdv1htHs9nUxKNBboe2x+tZz0/43yUwz6AJvVgoT8xm6o0yVKMLToD4slze3JP4H wawGw3GtYocDhSZGJl+r6Wpwet/0g6mGYvn9I= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; b=B4877o39HAudFUqH2svuqVzXJVaX9hD/isTDuv14YiPLbkli2QDGuNI8aXnq+/w491 3SIQaLjSMIuciywrDoEY/tYf9P87g9kcOqRBO7UyQHkVG5UxMUzCZIc0peXihuqyN5Q5 O231QdtjsJZDw0ukQ9YzkAGjWnJlnf8cJdO3Y= Received: by 10.213.25.78 with SMTP id y14mr2287549ebb.25.1300779329621; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 00:35:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.239.42] (xdsl-83-150-84-172.nebulazone.fi [83.150.84.172]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id x54sm2539257eeh.12.2011.03.22.00.35.28 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 22 Mar 2011 00:35:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: debloat-testing loadlatency test Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Jonathan Morton In-Reply-To: <92F8B514-76F9-45E5-BB9F-C94BA1CA66B4@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 09:35:27 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <5B81121B-300E-40F6-9DA7-9170B5221639@gmail.com> References: <87wrjsbki1.fsf@cruithne.co.teklibre.org> <92F8B514-76F9-45E5-BB9F-C94BA1CA66B4@gmail.com> To: Jonathan Morton X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082) Cc: bloat-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-BeenThere: bloat-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers working on AQM, device drivers, and networking stacks" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 07:35:32 -0000 On 21 Mar, 2011, at 9:43 pm, Jonathan Morton wrote: > I'd like to establish that high smoothness and responsiveness figures = are actually possible. And here is the beginning of that proof: a run between my MBP and my = firewall (an old PowerBook G3 running Linux) over Ethernet. The G3 only = supports 100base-TX, but has SFQ turned on for that port, and is using = my Blackpool mod (designed for 3G) in it's TCP stack. The MBP is stock = Snow Leopard fare. MinRTT: 0.0ms Scenario 1: 0 uploads, 1 downloads... 11486 KiB/s down, 30.19 Hz = smoothness Scenario 2: 1 uploads, 0 downloads... 11439 KiB/s up, 68.72 Hz = smoothness Scenario 3: 0 uploads, 2 downloads... 11506 KiB/s down, 28.20 Hz = smoothness Scenario 4: 1 uploads, 1 downloads... 11293 KiB/s up, 5024 KiB/s down, = 26.74 Hz smoothness Scenario 5: 2 uploads, 0 downloads... 11474 KiB/s up, 37.20 Hz = smoothness Scenario 6: 0 uploads, 3 downloads... 11514 KiB/s down, 20.26 Hz = smoothness Scenario 7: 1 uploads, 2 downloads... 10946 KiB/s up, 7253 KiB/s down, = 20.76 Hz smoothness Scenario 8: 2 uploads, 1 downloads... 11361 KiB/s up, 4428 KiB/s down, = 21.33 Hz smoothness Scenario 9: 3 uploads, 0 downloads... 11471 KiB/s up, 21.91 Hz = smoothness Scenario 10: 0 uploads, 4 downloads... 11515 KiB/s down, 19.66 Hz = smoothness Scenario 11: 1 uploads, 3 downloads... 9911 KiB/s up, 8196 KiB/s down, = 23.96 Hz smoothness Scenario 12: 2 uploads, 2 downloads... 11319 KiB/s up, 4705 KiB/s down, = 9.80 Hz smoothness Scenario 13: 3 uploads, 1 downloads... 11355 KiB/s up, 4230 KiB/s down, = 19.53 Hz smoothness Scenario 14: 4 uploads, 0 downloads... 11482 KiB/s up, 15.77 Hz = smoothness Scenario 15: 0 uploads, 32 downloads... 10673 KiB/s down, 0.68 Hz = smoothness Scenario 16: 1 uploads, 31 downloads... 1441 KiB/s up, 11462 KiB/s down, = 1.97 Hz smoothness Scenario 17: 16 uploads, 16 downloads... 11477 KiB/s up, 5043 KiB/s = down, 2.48 Hz smoothness Scenario 18: 31 uploads, 1 downloads... 11640 KiB/s up, 1561 KiB/s down, = 0.48 Hz smoothness Scenario 19: 32 uploads, 0 downloads... 11775 KiB/s up, 6.70 Hz = smoothness OVERALL: Upload Capacity: 7584 KiB/s Download Capacity: 5598 KiB/s Link Responsiveness: 0 Hz Flow Smoothness: 0 Hz The overall stats are still dragged down by poor 32-flow results, but = notice that even with 32 uploads (towards the G3), the smoothness is = considerably improved from the untweaked GigE situation. For up to 4 = flows, the smoothness remains high even with excellent link utilisation. And this is with CUBIC being used on the G3, with nothing to trigger = ECN. That's probably the combination that drags down the 32-flow = results. - Jonathan