From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <sesse@samfundet.no>
Received: from cassarossa.samfundet.no (cassarossa.samfundet.no
 [IPv6:2001:67c:29f4::29])
 (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 DBEC43B2A2
 for <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 13:04:49 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from pannekake.samfundet.no ([2001:67c:29f4::50] ident=unknown)
 by cassarossa.samfundet.no with esmtps
 (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <sesse@samfundet.no>) id 1bzo6h-0004Hx-4t
 for bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 19:04:48 +0200
Received: from sesse by pannekake.samfundet.no with local (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <sesse@samfundet.no>) id 1bzo6h-0009Mp-2W
 for bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 19:04:47 +0200
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 19:04:47 +0200
From: "Steinar H. Gunderson" <sgunderson@bigfoot.com>
To: bloat <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Message-ID: <20161027170447.GA28383@sesse.net>
References: <CAA93jw7AnChqZue4nfo_SBXgD_NKcXdEcR96tQv7Anrwx=NGCA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20161021084726.GA1913@sesse.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20161021084726.GA1913@sesse.net>
X-Operating-System: Linux 4.9.0-rc2 on a x86_64
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Subject: Re: [Bloat] "BBR" TCP patches submitted to linux kernel
X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20
Precedence: list
List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat <bloat.lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/options/bloat>,
 <mailto:bloat-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/bloat>
List-Post: <mailto:bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bloat-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat>,
 <mailto:bloat-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 17:04:50 -0000

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 10:47:26AM +0200, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
> As a random data point, I tried a single flow from my main server in .no
> to my backup server in .nl and compared CUBIC (with sch_fq) to BBR (naturally
> also in sch_fq) on the sender side. The results were quite consistent across
> runs:

Another datapoint: A friend of mine had a different, worse path (of about 40 ms)
and tested with iperf.

CUBIC delivered 20.1 Mbit/sec (highly varying). BBR delivered 485 Mbit/sec.

/* Steinar */
-- 
Homepage: https://www.sesse.net/