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 4E7CC3BA8E for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2018 07:23:05 -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 0M8edX-1gLAgO1rfP-00wHJe; Fri, 29 Jun 2018 13:23:03 +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: Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 13:23:02 +0200 Cc: bloat Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: To: =?utf-8?Q?Jonas_M=C3=A5rtensson?= X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.8.2) X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:nZTY4PjHOdUI38kIW+zvi6oT4FlAmKU56YSiSbPg28fag3LwhDg 5+v+4gdC+0TdXD5ez7mPQEvGzsoBleKxh2of2bd8/PxPCkL9uIXaYRIFWflZSkyAyh7/Y/3 iLBt3mEBeYfSwmOOA7z8WWk0egdVSEg/KFuV83eVZcKgCNHbHDeZVunEJ+p9ZKff3POdfMp M4SV3E8oomRv/S/SHV21A== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:7qQPIEZW0CM=:LakIDHN0w/3YbZE4M4bv9g 28AyvE6cmJVY358l704e1cqcjUqpJcgZSnTisnxsKXsMdqCwmKTU4bR5hTm6pH4orKt1O/nvs AuLDQFDJ0LmSJ7GPNTLyRPaCDSwWbz7cs2o7XzEdngMhLtXmpO/NPlvE39FUxk8S0DvLPf8Ta k5q5mFyyJbInVytWCthrtJp5zSdsA8q8JV4v2hzn/8JqRotjI6T6h7U+/E/snB54ZhTKisf9A JsJOL2eeLJSWeGUEiK6ZTQMdy/R+Nr9XaP7ZqWja67vUCRGb6ypuphtQtCQ5EZGrgIhyB8O8w mOTDmiAWWzShpV52rdxiMHlaoa9RfKkRJSipOB6gKrZnJ0oFj0Gz7uFr7g2GIktmmCRRAVTK5 I5Yu5JjpA8EurZjk/9ST7ldINCDTRgwlHkXcvNp0/JeiWssBDgs3wwUTDlvN9DuWqy2zu2F7V rCAi5VbDJThi83tY3ofZ1FHhduzj+4rmOw7cIxJvcT/XNGuZCRM3hlEh7krlqIZlOnFNUXQvJ 18cD64KwzUNNcefx4EuRLcOCyEDENJIZLmxGpdEn0jPj1tjEfyFWIDz+KSko7zjjeINohDqp2 19HVZwEys4mfDnM8Zl6J2Nqgt//cWv0mAifH81rCmz2H4cSVixkvtBcFLtlJbEGcDHFxgft0M TQN+oY4vbMWHim3K3epQtfbkerHn2Dvz2DT9FPRZEbZLD/OjndJLDrjMLjSMh30Pn7qKrm1md HWH8W4PXeaZXsSms256CRDTcX68kgZEcZqNkARNJOrz/d+sys7bh7snqyE8Qv/WOo/M7Gk1fw eaBmDr/ 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: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 11:23:05 -0000 Hi Jonas, nice data. > On Jun 29, 2018, at 12:56, Jonas M=C3=A5rtensson = wrote: >=20 > Hi, >=20 > I have a 100/100 Mbit/s (advertised speed) connection over fiber (p2p, = not PON). The actual link rate is 1 Gbit/s. My ISP seems to be using = burst-tolerant shaping (similar to powerboost) as can be seen in this = speedtest where the download rate is 300+ Mbit/s and the upload rate is = around 150 Mbit/s for the first few seconds: >=20 > http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/35205027 >=20 > It can be discussed why they are doing this but my questions are more = related to the impact on the quality of my connection. The ISPs shaper = used to introduce some bufferbloat, especially on the downlink, and I've = been using sqm for a while to mitigate this. But recently they seem to = have changed some configuration since the bufferbloat is now almost = zero, except for some very short spikes which only show up when I check = "Hi-Res BufferBloat" in test preferences (see speedtest above). When I = enable sqm on my router with htb/fq_codel or cake the spikes disappear: >=20 > htb/fq_codel: > http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/35205620 >=20 > cake: > http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/35205718 >=20 > Another difference is that the "Re-xmit" percentage (which I guess is = related to packet loss) is much higher without sqm enabled. Intuitively = this makes sense since temporarily allowing a higher rate should result = in more buffer overflow when the rate is decreased. >=20 > So, what do you think: >=20 > - Are the latency spikes real? I believe so, but I would try to use flent's rrul test to see = whether theses also show up outside of a browser-based test. > The fact that they disappear with sqm suggests so but what could cause = such short spikes? Is it related to the powerboost? I do not think so, as you have these spikes all over the upload = test while the boost only last for around a third of the test. >=20 > - Would you enable sqm on this connection? Personally I would, but for me the per host isolation is one of = the features I really like to have.=20 > By doing so I miss out on the higher rate for the first few seconds. = What are the actual downsides of not enabling sqm in this case? Well, you loose some bandwidth but that seems to be it, you gain = all the other nice features that especially cake offers. Best Regards Sebastian >=20 > /Jonas > _______________________________________________ > Bloat mailing list > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat