From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wg0-f47.google.com (mail-wg0-f47.google.com [74.125.82.47]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 25501200830 for ; Sat, 7 Apr 2012 08:25:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: by wgbge7 with SMTP id ge7so2395796wgb.28 for ; Sat, 07 Apr 2012 08:25:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=9uYJrfFcXJ4pXQgy08dGPGHOYB+sgEvzSNxGwhxh8ow=; b=RPfBN02EHd1dxO8ttvo0/x8ZQG7QjWbo4iQWh+FC6vbUOuwgY+oRSmjPia6GUgEHVc IMDtohIl+6Rmv1DJ8+iE5TUyG2ytvGfFGvkkQFf6agDidjfQYLzl+FksBFeZWgm5c5l3 qUobyX60uhn6nZJk0d5sdHiCxYCeEwf9DeOsZjol3/3IV7AXKP/cb+cqzNn1DWteQNl1 nqK4WZWgWQ8LuYY+ZVg/DKDjTgQFh0pGcan4COdRWEa/voOrq4x704f4kKAy2Xm/WxQC KJQBzzcjPj+TVx+cWGognPBOfI4QqGRCFrBeR/00gIXGZFjI9jJWpcM65m197dY3ISq2 99Zw== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.180.103.134 with SMTP id fw6mr4562707wib.0.1333812318181; Sat, 07 Apr 2012 08:25:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.223.127.194 with HTTP; Sat, 7 Apr 2012 08:25:18 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1333811327.30705.4.camel@edumazet-laptop> References: <20120406213725.GA12641@uio.no> <20120406222138.GB12641@uio.no> <1333811327.30705.4.camel@edumazet-laptop> Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2012 08:25:18 -0700 Message-ID: From: Dave Taht To: Eric Dumazet Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net Subject: Re: [Bloat] Best practices for paced TCP on Linux? X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2012 15:25:20 -0000 The test HD tcp stream is up at http://cesur.tg12.gathering.org:9094/ on both ipv6 and ipv4. They are streaming anywhere up to 1000 users, and there is an astounding amount of ipv6 present - 73% of the room has an ipv6 address. I took some captures from california last night, they were interesting. I think a few more captures would also be interesting. One indicated throttling at the isp at t+60 seconds, the others showed stuff dropping out for large periods of time. (170ms rtt here!) I'd like to look into what percentage of the failures I observed happened on the wifi hop vs the ethernet gateway since then many changes where made, and I'm low on sleep. (what do geeks do on a friday night?) I don't know if they are still trying sfqred or qfq in production - they worked! - but had little effect (as is to be kind of expected with the instantaneous queue length being so short and bandwidth so high on their first and nearest hops....) On Sat, Apr 7, 2012 at 8:08 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote= : > Le samedi 07 avril 2012 =E0 00:21 +0200, Steinar H. Gunderson a =E9crit : > >> I'll be perfectly happy just doing _something_; I don't need a perfect >> solution. We have one more night of streaming, and then the event is ove= r. :-) --=20 Dave T=E4ht SKYPE: davetaht US Tel: 1-239-829-5608 http://www.bufferbloat.net