From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qt0-x22d.google.com (mail-qt0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::22d]) (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 516653B2A4 for ; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 10:09:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-qt0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id z6-v6so2938620qti.2 for ; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 07:09:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=C0gHRyVAprzCCEVyNIqf1toZ0dEPkzNkltVFjtBMhNE=; b=p7/1jTNGMLmY7aAS/nwhcL20flWJDI1CR6793bUYgD8BBwwBkHF9Pr64lELKEIqYCG jOCRYbxJVma/3Ir6zvrg5GDNJZe7J2uyZyFWI9dYrU+HlFyr0hwgdZGg0aHzw4cpY07R FSXEfa2YD59YCvdxzYLwQ6KFDzhNatEoTOffZwQLWM/5qmYNn4En1DxromfdDPMF0RX3 WzG0bfpS30o3mm+cWM9al00XcV/w2EBcJ4ZxH+vmvRcwJkHtsplyCJ9MKNg4piHyxBVx +L55FOan1YKCAmICOpZctcLNSEG2DRQwgrTW/sLjvt5jQqAvBUyDma0Bvzf7qdkUtxTd q9sQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=C0gHRyVAprzCCEVyNIqf1toZ0dEPkzNkltVFjtBMhNE=; b=ElTsgZljN4eR2BdZ7EA9fOgrLA908eTE45AKDjNxJSxNjcncESOVsElQqIO+dSparq EVDA+2I8Xx0mFtLPAMO27+G0AGmSPzv8n/7e3sPL2KSJY77OMjSlaF9+qnnKO4fg1W8W KmLGzvvfGVKHdMtznjEAwO4i+2sOvztiPN5C2N10KtmwHA0RNbYPYUTFCj6975rzFHAP 7VeKgePB9HU/jG9EShc0pXagGyrawx5H/KlgcjanY9zVIJPaJAx3ydXuOUHvrQIExKvU p3Ffx3EI6KgBcb5NWlCKTG4XunQYGbSRZpp5PPOtrf46k1o3sqaVNlznIg+nwjvSJprE C/2Q== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E2I5kD4V8HqPYgZb4NfwnRjbtjD3uD+VWZEtyFCUu+DNgCmAYod 2z2U9ABNyBh7oZWGeMohI24= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKI5tJcpbosr0hh4HBobXN/FYxXEW9ggI4jSDYdZ8DyrU6ix1+M0VA2tieK04lT+sO4nEdpCJA== X-Received: by 2002:a0c:f905:: with SMTP id v5-v6mr22237255qvn.207.1529590181620; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 07:09:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from richs-mbp-10337.lan (d-ptld-bng2-64-222-155-30.ngn.east.myfairpoint.net. [64.222.155.30]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b15-v6sm3389401qkc.90.2018.06.21.07.09.40 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 21 Jun 2018 07:09:40 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\)) From: Rich Brown In-Reply-To: <5A3E79BF-A6C7-488E-8C59-E25B552AC87D@gmx.de> Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 10:09:39 -0400 Cc: Jonathan Foulkes , bloat Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <9CD67F96-3B88-4268-B6BD-8D73BF855A0E@gmail.com> References: <03A702AD-5CC1-42CD-A9BF-783E3183AEF5@gmail.com> <7C6CFE9E-7051-4CB5-8C03-6CA722D4E9C2@jonathanfoulkes.com> <5A3E79BF-A6C7-488E-8C59-E25B552AC87D@gmx.de> To: Sebastian Moeller X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273) 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 14:09:42 -0000 Hi folks, It's great to get all this advice from people who know more than I do = :-) (I should note that the bonded DSL seemed to be working as expected = using the no-sqm speed minus 5% procedure.) Once all the solstice celebrations this weekend settle down (Happy = Summer!), I'll pull together some data from the DSL modem and the ATM = Overhead Detector and share it with the list. Best, Rich > On Jun 21, 2018, at 9:35 AM, Sebastian Moeller = wrote: >=20 > Hi Jonathan, >=20 >> 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 >=20 > Thank you very much, all very useful to know. >=20 >=20 > @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). >=20 > 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. >=20 > Best Regards > Sebastian >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >> 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 >=20