Pardon my ignorance. As a late comer, I did not know the rules of the two mailing lists. In fact I did not even know the bloat mailing list existed. Only knew of the bloat-devel. I will use the former in the future. Thanks again Best Azin On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 5:27 PM Sebastian Moeller wrote: > > > > On Jan 22, 2019, at 23:00, Dave Taht wrote: > > > > btw, I didn't even remember we had a bloat-devel mailing list. please > > use bloat instead > > And I thought we use the bloat list to talk about bloat and how to get rid > of it and use bloat-devel exclusively to talk about developing bloat. I > took the radio silence as indicator, that we agree that there is sufficient > "high-quality" bloat around that further development was not required > yet... ;) > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 1:59 PM Azin Neishaboori > > wrote: > >> > >> Dear Dave > >> > >> Thank you for responding. I will email you the *.flent.gz files > tomorrow and share the other plots here. Thank you for the advice to run > tcp_nup and down tests. I can do those and report as well tomorrow. > >> > >> > >> Regarding your comment on the 200ms delay, well, the bbr paper > published by the google team does mention the wifi and cellular LTE links. > And the LTE links do have as documented higher delays, even higher under > mobility. Yet the bbr paper claims that bbr works well for them as well. > But the LTE test results I have got so far do not seem very promising. > >> > >> Thank you again for taking time and responding to my email. Tomorrow I > will send further info as mentioned above. > >> > >> Best > >> Azin > >> > >> On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 4:07 PM Dave Taht wrote: > >>> > >>> I am a huge believer in also seeing the baseline *.flent.gz files and > other plots you can get via the flent-gui... if you could post them > somewhere or send to me privately? Two examples are obtaining the baseline > RTT, > >>> and it would be my hope, over time, that BBR would have found the > baseline RTT later in the test (the up or down bandwidth plots) than is > shown by these summary plots. Also as much as I love the rrul tests for > quickly showing the characteristics of a link under load, BBR makes the > assumption that flows start up one at a time, and a better string of basic > tests would be to use tcp_nup or tcp_ndown. > >>> > >>> From squinting... It looks like the *baseline* RTT in this test is > ~200ms. There really isn't much in this world that works particularly well > with RTTs this large. > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Dave Täht > > CTO, TekLibre, LLC > > http://www.teklibre.com > > Tel: 1-831-205-9740 > > _______________________________________________ > > Bloat mailing list > > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net > > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat > > _______________________________________________ > Bloat-devel mailing list > Bloat-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat-devel >