From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.18]) (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 495A63B2A4 for ; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 09:35:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [172.16.11.169] ([134.76.241.253]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx002 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MXIov-1fk4e03J9J-00WJDP; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 15:35:49 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.4 \(3445.8.2\)) From: Sebastian Moeller In-Reply-To: <7C6CFE9E-7051-4CB5-8C03-6CA722D4E9C2@jonathanfoulkes.com> Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 15:35:48 +0200 Cc: Rich Brown , bloat Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <5A3E79BF-A6C7-488E-8C59-E25B552AC87D@gmx.de> References: <03A702AD-5CC1-42CD-A9BF-783E3183AEF5@gmail.com> <7C6CFE9E-7051-4CB5-8C03-6CA722D4E9C2@jonathanfoulkes.com> To: Jonathan Foulkes X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.8.2) X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:vxZRF8ZJBBLBlACRCfYLw7XyOOINhxAUPMBpvVzHQPdmregB+/Y RaWCkWXdT/zfWFef/4slocWp4H8XmSor1/zSDPo21ieORL8BaXvc1EkU2kgR0vjwW1aKpdC SLqc9UzRrq5viEPPDQr+38oaNtyqb19l7WgeBzcbQxj94YL7zaedkjFexB1nvmkDKnvWYRs n2thGKN4FY2MCSfM8XVMw== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:+O7+7HO5LXk=:OEYz+bP1eyzAIi+2Bsgs/W lWjQrb+WnosVf0FYfLayIJ38XMklYneC9rAPmn6vmrpfeR6JAnL9kko22ORnEOjS99UQFAMbP E0sAx8uVcedYtnXNux1V7XydYxYJtPNEClleH/KEui4uBRWJJERPSdXv0hD8b6KFWiOcFxqhT wcEm4VQWRSKcfc8XYOD1crPF4ifplLwtusD4InyWzDP8EuW42pgqbSgNj9bjloNmc648SqUSS Aa6/Zit4J77LiATeMLVbCwgsnLcfhdRvJL1LHEWdnToTKv1S5OZr8opbsTkI7chaml+YFiSSe iU9kiJr/JO+mYwiHQziTGIZRenRs53B6lRj1wHRNJCBZyFd2k5JFMfmZ88NUXQWG7t+zosmF4 Wo1mY9cIXjyiCiIbNLMVwbn/h6qaJx3XLTsd1xuQ/BMrLYTRrTsha++W6WzUoO6/KFMhVnFjg giXzEtX5wDURgW/nukiXRFZmdRlGNggAEHk6MrgzyMD108FJhJpHcfjntscvddOLPGMY0+2Gt +w30Hk/OBVxv3Eu7WWe7pi69ecUVEFPiJN/AiCXBig70xZpi2m0rmBjbYnEw6Rz6uGpSt8GtE vZUC0RzprEfkQYW3p3UzvqVHbJglsahNW2hyQnZL7gfnxUQWEsaemhf5HKC892xZG8Dvvkfhc DQOuFfu/oZc2vaDko5Efi+IYhcOybu8YA5VyDoN3mPJhc+96sMiHUIMqgXK4ngkrCkownUOnd gnqVUGrw9u2nWrjURsrgyZzhUiH3tBvFHEg+h/z/YyNLPJrKor/VE+4Agr90KHGZ3DvVqHvNC RMlqTof Subject: Re: [Bloat] SQM Settings for Bonded DSL? X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 13:35:53 -0000 Hi Jonathan, > On Jun 21, 2018, at 15:16, Jonathan Foulkes = wrote: >=20 > Hi Rich, Sebastian, >=20 > Most bonded modems do a good job of making the line look just like a = single, higher-capacity line. The only major issues I=E2=80=99ve = observed is when the bonded lines have some asymmetry to them (e.g. one = link has weaker SNR), then the bond drops, re-synchs and continues. But = occasionally, it will run for extended periods at 50% capacity (i.e. on = only one of the lines). > It uses PMT protocols, so not at all like mwan3, as any one connection = can achieve full throughput of the bonded set. >=20 > I have data on hundreds of bonded lines, and other than the scenarios = I mentioned above about bad bonds, as far as SQM goes, it behaves just = like any other DSL line of equal capacity. So all the same guidelines = would apply. >=20 Thank you very much, all very useful to know. @Rich, could I ask you to try to run the = https://github.com/moeller0/ATM_overhead_detector on your shiny bonded = link? I am really curious how this will cope with such a link (I expect = no issues, but the proof and the pudding thing still applies). Also I see that bonding might have additional overhead that might not be = per packet so will not be picked up by ATM_overhead_detector, so you = might need to aim a bit lower with the shaper settings than usually. Best Regards Sebastian > I hope that helps, >=20 > Jonathan Foulkes >=20 >> On Jun 21, 2018, at 7:14 AM, Sebastian Moeller = wrote: >>=20 >> Hi Rich, >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>> On Jun 21, 2018, at 13:08, Rich Brown = wrote: >>>=20 >>> Hi folks, >>>=20 >>> Our local DSL ISP (Consolidated Communications, Inc, formerly = Fairpoint) recently installed a Smart/RG SR555ac = (https://www.smartrg.com/sr555ac) bonded ADSL2 modem. >>>=20 >>> I seem to remember earlier messages stating that the dual queues in = the DSL modem screwed up (or, de-optimized) the SQM in the router.=20 >>=20 >> As far as I can see this should not really cause an issue = (besides that latency for single packets will be limited by the fact = that you have two half-total-bandwidth links) except maybe that there = might be additional overhead for the bonding on the link, but I have = never looked at channel bonding so this is pure spekulation. I assume = here that your Modem handles the bonding transparently. I could envision = that running an non-transparent load-balancer (like with mwan3 under = openwrt) might introduce issues for sqm, but if all you see is one = ethernet link to the modem I do not expect any major quirks (except = latency not being in line with the expectancy from total bandwidth). >>=20 >>>=20 >>> The web GUI does provide info on SNR, sync rates, etc. Any advice = for SQM beyond the standard, "measure the no-SQM speed, then start at 5% = below..."? Thanks. >>=20 >> I am curius myself and would like to ask you to keep me/the list = posted on whatever you find out about the applicability of sqm to = bonding. >>=20 >> Best Regards >> Sebastian >>=20 >>=20 >>>=20 >>> Rich >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Bloat mailing list >>> Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net >>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> Bloat mailing list >> Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat >=20