From: Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>
To: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
Cc: Y <intruder_tkyf@yahoo.fr>, bloat <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: [Bloat] Stab overhead caliculation and mpu for ingress shaping.
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2017 09:14:38 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9CD91440-4C3B-49A2-972C-9CF1C7FBE0DD@gmx.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170302085559.76c6773e@redhat.com>
Hi Jesper,
> On Mar 2, 2017, at 08:55, Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 22:36:25 +0100
> Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
>
>> I typically would try to run
>> https://github.com/moeller0/ATM_overhead_detector to empirically
>> figure out the per packet overhead (but I note that this has never
>> been tested with PPPoA data as far as I can remember)
>
> Cool project, you have an ATM_overhead_detector :-)
Well, the name is a bit over optimistic, but the principle is sound and seems to work quite well. It is basically, just as README.md says, a pretty straight forward implementation of what you have developed & demonstrated in your Master’s thesis. While simply trying to illustrate the ATM cell staircase, it dawned upon me that since each packet uses an integer number of atm cells, it should be possible to estimate the “hidden" overhead, simply by looking at the how many unaccounted bytes are missing in the plot of the first ATM cell…
Naming it detector is somewhat overplaying my cards, since I do not do a proper classification, but simply show whether the ATM staircase better fits the data than a simple linear fit… It is relatively useful though, on known ATM links to empirically figure out the actual per packet overhead.
>
> Something I always missed, and I never got around to create such a
> tool. Thanks for doing this :-) (I don't have time atm to play with
> it, but it looks cool)
Thanks for the kind words. It was yours and Russel Stuarts work that got me started in the first place, so that is quite flattering ;)
Best Regards
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Jesper Dangaard Brouer
> MSc.CS, Principal Kernel Engineer at Red Hat
> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer
prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-02 8:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-01 18:37 Y
2017-03-01 21:36 ` Sebastian Moeller
2017-03-02 2:23 ` Y
2017-03-02 2:28 ` Y
2017-03-02 7:55 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2017-03-02 8:14 ` Sebastian Moeller [this message]
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=9CD91440-4C3B-49A2-972C-9CF1C7FBE0DD@gmx.de \
--to=moeller0@gmx.de \
--cc=bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net \
--cc=brouer@redhat.com \
--cc=intruder_tkyf@yahoo.fr \
/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