From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-vs1-xe2d.google.com (mail-vs1-xe2d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e2d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DFF4F3CB36 for ; Fri, 18 Jan 2019 02:54:29 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-vs1-xe2d.google.com with SMTP id n10so7868529vso.13 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2019 23:54:29 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=zDHSbeSyI7VzZV8ukhMehRJbmpDhFJpUQXiPJirTLKA=; b=nCl24enk/akiq9zbcWivY0uPohArZlm5+S9VDSmhr/WuqPtJtEWZJSRHHX6U/FUXMk a+dHddKAmzA+T0lDLoVUgH36OCf+2/woT4XUHcNXx1YygXY6e9C6++3mYCQu2EG7jh/t TKRNmLWi83xDAch2WJXYL0vBiEgOkO91nJPmJqmXO4AIqfVl3m/LhQ1whQFxmlqRs6rN lmZJdzb3JpJIVu8/YJHnKD3V64K8cib6FoW6se31etXnuPDFTNVluMzLsbHP4tgcQC9o a6tjZT4SxxCgp6N62lATmDrCnEjF4kf82EnzhEvSmjDYNsqKxPJd4dUtTU2sO3buyveS lPIQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=zDHSbeSyI7VzZV8ukhMehRJbmpDhFJpUQXiPJirTLKA=; b=cl3/C1OFH+oSXGUZbtdltvkoQEQvuQzrzPDAZ6c4zSu17l58c5Zeps4Vl34qhVCYSW tTB/mU5Ra5aJCPMGcLlieOys1Ms4v5n7vnZQTTwcf0fsyxjfe/Mfev/G+IN0NVoFMKOb BoYd3X9onNya9OsDks9CYx5Zse3pmJUPcr+0KvTRKHIDDQswXPoh6p/0MjPvXmyuaiR3 zC39R5ffu52rfOKmSboVdYcxNgvTg9BEnhh6MNIsXd5e3N10khKnwuSyzYhXjJOaS1OP k0yC7vPjFTCKyMFno7UoOwSX02Wh1wIPeBq4sKZ8e7RdCkLh1MQyMutEGvERLewQ65Es 8FJQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AJcUukdg55EykzqmqKGDY2NzPmP1QjSpVhDDajvF9yi0GIwGMDxlhj6E B7b1Qto+60mJa6M5fYA33SignsUcqwRKpsOp2BI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN7nJjnCek0S3uCMKRM9MDBxRey1oXxI0m/DjKu126E9FgfSxinkm9JTLZ70PXjavKxVlAEt0Qh5t2gAdFxaQbc= X-Received: by 2002:a67:b44:: with SMTP id 65mr7105766vsl.77.1547798069422; Thu, 17 Jan 2019 23:54:29 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Azin Neishaboori Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2019 02:54:18 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: contradictory WiFi flent results To: George Lambert , "bloat-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000001cb42b057fb6d280" X-BeenThere: bloat-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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: Fri, 18 Jan 2019 07:54:30 -0000 --0000000000001cb42b057fb6d280 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi George Thank you for your reply and helpful comments. You are right. There are too many players at hand on my setup=E2=80=99s datapath. I will try to set up more controlled experiments. Thanks Best Azin On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 12:24 AM George Lambert wrote: > I have been on this list for a long time, but I don't normally respond. > > With that said, you should keep in mind that when you are using a VM / > there is a software IP stack that is touching and playing with your > packets. > > I would consider if it is easy to try the following to give yourself a > more controlled test environment. > > 1. run a USB OS without a VM on raw metal to remove the extra network > routing stacks > 2. directly cable into your router to eliminate any potential "802.11" > interference from other devices and neighbors > 3. see if you get the same/similar results > 4. For optimal test results - PowerCycle your router to be sure that it > has freshly reset it's memory - > 5. Do a traceroute to see if your connection is experiencing any > interference / packetloss in the route between yourself and the remote > server. > > George - > ps: If you would like to google hangout or zoom.us to check the > configuration / I could spend a few minutes with you. > > On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 11:25 PM Azin Neishaboori < > azin.neishaboori@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Dear all >> I have some contradictory results on my WiFi link. I run flent's rrul >> test using several bufferbloat mitigation algorithms, and see that, >> compared to FQ_codel, TCP BBR, etc., a simple prioritized ACK works the >> best. Why is that I have no idea. I also am not clear as to why using BB= R >> on the client end increases the download throughput, but not upload (sti= ll >> doing worse than prioritized ACK on cubic in download anyway). Attached >> please see the plot. >> What am I missing? >> >> My setup is pretty simple. I am on WiFi on my PC, and run flent on an >> Ubuntu VM on a virtual machine, and connect to netperf.bufferbloat.net. >> All configurations are done on my VM end of course. >> >> Any help/hint would be appreciated. >> >> Thanks a lot >> Best >> Azin >> > _______________________________________________ >> Bloat-devel mailing list >> Bloat-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat-devel >> > > > -- > P THINK BEFORE PRINTING: is it really necessary? > > This e-mail and its attachments are confidential and solely for the > intended addressee(s). Do not share or use them without approval. If > received in error, contact the sender > and delete them. > --0000000000001cb42b057fb6d280 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi George
Thank you for your reply and helpful comments. You are right.= There are too many players at hand on my setup=E2=80=99s datapath.

I will try to set up more controlled experiments.

Thanks=C2=A0
Best
Azin

On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 12:24 AM George Lambe= rt <marchon@gmail.com> wrote= :
I have been on this list for= a long time, but I don't=C2=A0normally respond.

Wit= h that said, you should keep in mind that when you are using a VM / there i= s a software IP stack that is touching and playing with your packets.=C2=A0=

I would consider if it is easy to try the followi= ng to give yourself a more controlled test environment.=C2=A0
1. run a USB OS without a VM on raw metal to remove the extra n= etwork routing stacks
2. directly cable into your router to elimi= nate any potential "802.11" interference from other devices and n= eighbors=C2=A0
3. see if you get the same/similar results=C2=A0
4. For optimal test results - PowerCycle your router to be sure th= at it has freshly reset it's memory -=C2=A0
5. Do a tracerout= e to see if your connection is experiencing any interference / packetloss= =C2=A0in the route between yourself and the remote server.=C2=A0
<= div>
George -
ps: If you would like to google hango= ut or zoom.us to check the= configuration / I could spend a few minutes with you.

On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 11:25 PM Azin Neishaboor= i <azin.= neishaboori@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear all
I h= ave some contradictory results on my WiFi link. I run flent's rrul test= using several bufferbloat mitigation algorithms, and see that, compared to= FQ_codel, TCP BBR, etc., a simple prioritized ACK works the best. Why is t= hat I have no idea. I also am not clear as to why using BBR on the client e= nd increases the download throughput, but not upload (still doing worse tha= n prioritized ACK on cubic in download anyway). Attached please see the plo= t.=C2=A0
What am I=C2=A0missing?

My setu= p is pretty simple. I am on WiFi on my PC, and run flent on an Ubuntu VM on= a virtual machine, and connect to netperf.bufferbloat.net. All configurations are do= ne on my VM end of course.=C2=A0

Any help/hint wou= ld be appreciated.

Thanks a lot
Best
= Azin
_______________________________________________
Bloat-devel mailing list
Bloa= t-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat-devel=


--
P THINK BEFORE PRINTING: is it really n= ecessary?

This e-mail and its attachments are confidential and solel= y for the
intended addressee(s). Do not share or use them without approv= al. If received in error, contact the sender
and delete them.
--0000000000001cb42b057fb6d280--