From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wr0-x242.google.com (mail-wr0-x242.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c0c::242]) (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 BACCB3BA8E for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 03:46:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-wr0-x242.google.com with SMTP id h10-v6so10769232wrq.8 for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 00:46:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=heistp.net; s=google; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=1/JCJL6IKmR9jfog3mKe64X4/SXt2+B+KpGFb8oAMxk=; b=g9ncWu182E5f3YU4CUMHLaEnSfCbrUogBXAm1p6eX7paqemqUnvmImwcPFsA460ohO qXkheeqmWVrna8RRnjkOtCqu5QrZGsXQ/xwzjyFK3t2ht6NOEcUeeeqBiBubfdQ8g94q 4FoXwDVduMjXkUib8J/Pc5te3s7gUBlp7X616Sn/CE434hnUOwnovfTvpLSmu9jmnDHd 2+hj4hRFHcB71NMzbdFxWfSm+4b6mj/bqs9j4mAVs839sICCVD1BB4cf/RgSUwl9sVJT yf7SnXFQE4p3nR6HAIdEnvFa3jX7i50ftGpJL2Et3cIftsGmxSD6FexuVWfwifitoCwz SemQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=1/JCJL6IKmR9jfog3mKe64X4/SXt2+B+KpGFb8oAMxk=; b=QEjMl8PLuRGKrWN9HLHZYB4nUEgigrFyL+gpdmBHSBdEwMiOw5UY1C678/CaijdB++ yg+4l8NOgMvnpDuaPJAaQacfonM+ozdO18XfIJApCGyv+oLYq3vvZG3SevKCSZ1J60PF LJIldQH9LaMrP/t5xK/2EAJwznx2hc8JCS6UfeChXXUThZfEX6fzVZZ8zwOH3uyerRSA MzMfPO7czCjGWH6lBamFktObxbNBcI3YWQqFA74xB7f1i522XE+4mYqpOKqeKJHRLp3K wH9osMjy+PeL/AwD2Q06n0h/CLCeR6yR+3W30Kl/yivXztS4KP6dfkFB9jk+KaST8aOa 0azg== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E39tC1kbRV9M9Irn97YckBhbLOeTI3XzyoK8GmvnoElWTFD7Xez tLM8HuqQaHClgcvtFxYZeJIJvg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpcoAo7i31FCkVFV8R8vHGXRgXbsjjeRMNCA9EzZqsoVGt5Mfcg23X5TN1k1CgGVItvN26eB1g== X-Received: by 2002:adf:9582:: with SMTP id p2-v6mr14167924wrp.252.1530344788855; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 00:46:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tron.lt2.drhleny.cz ([185.15.109.151]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m145-v6sm3549758wma.19.2018.06.30.00.46.27 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 30 Jun 2018 00:46:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Pete Heist Message-Id: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_31D1C806-8DBF-44BE-8A88-88C7E9E4087E" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.4 \(3445.8.2\)) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2018 09:46:27 +0200 In-Reply-To: Cc: bloat To: =?utf-8?Q?Jonas_M=C3=A5rtensson?= References: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.8.2) Subject: Re: [Bloat] powerboost and sqm 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: Sat, 30 Jun 2018 07:46:29 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_31D1C806-8DBF-44BE-8A88-88C7E9E4087E Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > On Jun 30, 2018, at 8:26 AM, Jonas M=C3=A5rtensson = wrote: >=20 > I played around with flent a bit, here are some example plots: >=20 > https://dl.dropbox.com/s/facariwkp5x5dh1/flent.zip?dl=3D1 = >=20 > The short spikes are not seen with flent so I'm led to believe these = are just a result of running the "Hi-Res" dslreports test in a browser. = In the flent rrul test, up to about 10 ms induced latency can be seen = during the "powerboost" phase but after that it is almost zero. I'm = curious about how this is implemented on the ISP side. If anything, sqm = seems to induce a bit more latency during the "steady-state" phase. You may also want to try running flent with --socket-stats and making a = tcp_rtt plot. You should see a significant difference in TCP RTT between = sfq and anything that uses CoDel. Also, double check the basics- that you=E2=80=99re truly in control of = the queue and the device running sqm isn=E2=80=99t running out of CPU = and has solid device drivers that aren=E2=80=99t causing periodic pauses = or other anomalies (which also follows for your client device). I=E2=80=99= ve been sideswiped by such things before when testing sqm, and making = theory and experiment fully agree can take science and time. Pete --Apple-Mail=_31D1C806-8DBF-44BE-8A88-88C7E9E4087E Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
On = Jun 30, 2018, at 8:26 AM, Jonas M=C3=A5rtensson <martensson.jonas@gmail.com> wrote:

I = played around with flent a bit, here are some example = plots:

https://dl.dropbox.com/s/facariwkp5x5dh1/flent.zip?dl=3D1

The = short spikes are not seen with flent so I'm led to believe these are = just a result of running the "Hi-Res" dslreports test in a browser. In = the flent rrul test, up to about 10 ms induced latency can be seen = during the "powerboost" phase but after that it is almost zero. I'm = curious about how this is implemented on the ISP side. If anything, sqm = seems to induce a bit more latency during the "steady-state" = phase.

You may also want to try running flent with = --socket-stats and making a tcp_rtt plot. You should see a significant = difference in TCP RTT between sfq and anything that uses = CoDel.

Also, = double check the basics- that you=E2=80=99re truly in control of the = queue and the device running sqm isn=E2=80=99t running out of CPU and = has solid device drivers that aren=E2=80=99t causing periodic pauses or = other anomalies (which also follows for your client device). I=E2=80=99ve = been sideswiped by such things before when testing sqm, and making = theory and experiment fully agree can take science and time.

Pete

= --Apple-Mail=_31D1C806-8DBF-44BE-8A88-88C7E9E4087E--