I just checked an attempt at testing reno_westwood_cubic_ledbat into toke's netperf-wrappers/tests repo. I guess it would be good to have some error checking to detect if we have those algs installed on both ends... Attached is a test against localhost on my linux 3.6 based machine (pfifo_fast) See how "slow start" is crazy! That makes some sense, but the other data doesn't. I am hoping I've merely misconfigured the test given the upload/download disparity, particularly with ledbat. (the ledbat code is out of tree and perhaps needs modification given "tcp small queues"? (https://github.com/silviov/TCP-LEDBAT) and From what I understand from mentally parsing netperf's examples/runemomni* netperf $HDR -t omni -c -C -H ${remote_hosts[$client]} -l $length $confidence -- $CSV -H ${remote_hosts[$client]} $socket_sizes -m 64K -u $NETUUID & HDR="-P 0"; .... netperf $HDR -t omni -c -C -H ${remote_hosts[$client]} -l $length $confidence -- $CSV -H ${remote_hosts[$client]} $socket_sizes -M ,64K -u $NETUUID & HDR="-P 0"; j=`expr $j + 1`; done; wait; -M ,64k is the equivalent of TCP_MAERTS ? and -m 64K is the equivalent of TCP_STREAM ? except that they are sending 64K at a time. Given that we are sending data sometimes at very low rates (384k on adsl), does it make sense to drop this figure to something lower? -- Dave Täht Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt: http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.html