From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.toke.dk (mail.toke.dk [45.145.95.4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 088D23B29E for ; Wed, 25 Mar 2020 07:03:04 -0400 (EDT) From: Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=20161023; t=1585134182; bh=OhH4Hihp/g+EvS3lH9dkjx7Emg+WdVKo3PuuropODDk=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=X5HAzVSfvsmfb/9SsCjg+b8dO1XqtuYg8D10Lmu+QaSboIq7ZrTibinRgyiUlBSFH oUqVak6rYTdUTpRrt9q+4UsL+MWMZKhesPvmVRT68CkBXVQqmox8xNcRN8QQ90hMxC u0A6MESfp1NE1+fnhMGDa74btg5ssQB6GVJe4GnEgW99JA5NPDZHFCSXKDIseqBFR/ 2XZBnR//N+6fFoLQUMK8jA2YVBJY0cRWckZ+YVc/ApPWt8Qn9oR5u8h96WNdWdi6oz BRHR+JrFWpckXNN4FcoT7skOjMRTHwuWohjtNC7fW9Gg32nAaSV2BCQ7EQbN68YEJn 9H8vijTivD5uA== To: Sebastian Moeller Cc: Aaron Wood , bloat In-Reply-To: References: <875zesret5.fsf@toke.dk> Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2020 12:03:01 +0100 X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Message-ID: <87r1xgpuhm.fsf@toke.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Bloat] Still seeing bloat with a DOCSIS 3.1 modem 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: Wed, 25 Mar 2020 11:03:04 -0000 Sebastian Moeller writes: > Hi Toke, > > >> On Mar 25, 2020, at 09:58, Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen wrote: >>=20 >> Aaron Wood writes: >>=20 >>> I recently upgraded service from 150up, 10dn Mbps to xfinity's gigabit >>> (with 35Mbps up) tier, and picked up a DOCSIS 3.1 modem to go with it. >>>=20 >>> Flent test results are here: >>> https://burntchrome.blogspot.com/2020/03/bufferbloat-with-comcast-gigab= it-with.html >>>=20 >>> tl/dr; 1000ms of upstream bufferbloat >>>=20 >>> But it's DOCSIS 3.1, so why isn't PIE working? Theory: It's in DOCSIS= 3.0 >>> upstream mode based on the status LEDs. Hopefully it will go away if I= can >>> convince it to run in DOCSIS 3.1 mode. >>=20 >> I think that while PIE is "mandatory to implement" in DOCSIS 3.1, the >> ISP still has to turn it on? So maybe yelling at them will work? (ha!) >>=20 >>> At the moment, however, my WRT1900AC isn't up to the task of dealing wi= th >>> these sorts of downstream rates. >>>=20 >>> So I'm looking at the apu2, which from this post: >>> https://forum.openwrt.org/t/comparative-throughput-testing-including-na= t-sqm-wireguard-and-openvpn/44724 >>>=20 >>> Will certainly get most of the way there. >>=20 >> My Turris Omnia is doing fine on my 1Gbps connection (although that >> hardly suffers from bloat, so I'm not doing any shaping; did try it >> though, and it has no problem with running CAKE at 1Gbps). > > Well, doing local network flent RRUL stress tests indicated that > my omnia (at that time with TOS4/Openwrt18) only allowed up to > 500/500 Mbps shaping with bi directionally saturating traffic > with full MTU-sized packets. So I undirectional CAKE at 1Gbps > can work, but under full load, I did not manage that, what did I > wrong? Hmm, not sure I've actually done full bidirectional shaping. And trying it now, it does seem to be struggling... -Toke