From: <erik.taraldsen@telenor.com>
To: <brouer@redhat.com>, <priyarjha@google.com>
Cc: <ncardwell@google.com>, <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: [Bloat] BBR implementations, knobs to turn?
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 07:57:04 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1605772623976.41134@telenor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201117160744.395f108e@carbon>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2183 bytes --]
Update:
The 5G router was connected to a new base station. Now the limiting factor of throughput is the policer on the PGW in mobile core, not the radio link itself. The SIM card used is limited to 30Mbit/s. This scenario favours the new server. I have attached graphs comparing radio link limited vs PGW policer results, and a zoomed in graph of the policer
We have Huawei RAN and Ericsson RAN, rate limited and not rate limited subscriptions, 4G and 5G access, and we are migrating to a new core with new PGW (policer). Starting to be a bit of a matrix to set up tests for.
-Erik
________________________________________
Fra: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
Sendt: 17. november 2020 16:07
Til: Taraldsen Erik; Priyaranjan Jha
Kopi: brouer@redhat.com; ncardwell@google.com; bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
Emne: Re: [Bloat] BBR implementations, knobs to turn?
On Tue, 17 Nov 2020 10:05:24 +0000 <erik.taraldsen@telenor.com> wrote:
> Thank you for the response Neal
Yes. And it is impressive how many highly qualified people are on the
bufferbloat list.
> old_hw # uname -r
> 5.3.0-64-generic
> (Ubuntu 19.10 on xenon workstation, integrated network card, 1Gbit
> GPON access. Used as proof of concept from the lab at work)
>
>
> new_hw # uname -r
> 4.18.0-193.19.1.el8_2.x86_64
> (Centos 8.2 on xenon rack server, discrete 10Gbit network card,
> 40Gbit server farm link (low utilization on link), intended as fully
> supported and run service. Not possible to have newer kernel and
> still get service agreement in my organization)
Let me help out here. The CentOS/RHEL8 kernels have a huge amount of
backports. I've attached a patch/diff of net/ipv4/tcp_bbr.c changes
missing in RHEL8.
It looks like these patches are missing in CentOS/RHEL8:
[1] https://git.kernel.org/torvalds/c/78dc70ebaa38aa3
[2] https://git.kernel.org/torvalds/c/a87c83d5ee25cf7
Could missing patch [1] result in the issue Erik is seeing?
(It explicitly mentions improvements for WiFi...)
--
Best regards,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer
MSc.CS, Principal Kernel Engineer at Red Hat
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer
[-- Attachment #2: Bridgemaster vs speedmonster - policed vs radiolink.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 234196 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #3: Bridgemaster vs speedmonster - policed zoomed.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 197756 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-11-19 7:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-11-16 15:25 erik.taraldsen
2020-11-16 21:14 ` Neal Cardwell
2020-11-17 10:05 ` erik.taraldsen
2020-11-17 15:07 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2020-11-19 7:57 ` erik.taraldsen [this message]
2020-11-19 13:32 ` Luca Muscariello
2020-11-19 14:35 ` erik.taraldsen
2020-11-20 11:10 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2020-11-20 12:42 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2020-11-23 12:57 ` erik.taraldsen
2020-11-30 17:18 ` Aaron Wood
2020-11-20 23:34 ` Neal Cardwell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://lists.bufferbloat.net/postorius/lists/bloat.lists.bufferbloat.net/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1605772623976.41134@telenor.com \
--to=erik.taraldsen@telenor.com \
--cc=bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net \
--cc=brouer@redhat.com \
--cc=ncardwell@google.com \
--cc=priyarjha@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox