From: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
To: bloat <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>, Justin Beech <justin@dslr.net>
Subject: Re: [Bloat] some 110Mbit cable testing of the new dslreports stuff
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2015 21:47:29 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAA93jw7HwRkJa9J9mS-LsTs+7heK3_C3g8LgC4MYqhQ=FBgCNg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAA93jw6-vRfGPHMMs17bXbYaqL1+5oA0fp5L=w9Pf5UsynHLRQ@mail.gmail.com>
revisiting the ratings on these tests below, the first test should get
an F, somehow. That is *normal* behavior for a comcast link.
The rest look pretty good, fq_codel generally gets an A, pure AQM a B.
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:
> For reference, this is the comcast link under test, with no shaping at all:
>
> http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/377563
>
> (horrific, isn't it?)
>
> I did a few fq_codel + ecn tests
>
> http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/377389
> http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/377429
>
> And cake: http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/377505
>
> No ecn fq_codel: http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/377443
>
> no ecn with pie: http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/377488
>
> no ecn with ns2_codel: http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/377563
>
> no ecn with codel: http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/377703
>
> It is difficult to conclude anything from the download tests without
> going through the captures, although the uplink tests look reasonable
> compared to the rrul tests. If it wasn't for the pie result, I would
> assume it was the browser misbehaving on downloads, or the server. The
> tcp_download tests taken with the same setup with netperf-wrapper show
> what I had assumed til now a normal variance of latency.
>
> http://snapon.lab.bufferbloat.net/~d/yurtlab100.tgz is that set of results
>
> http://snapon.lab.bufferbloat.net/~d/yurtlab100/tcp_download_vs_dslreports.png
>
> Puzzled, I
>
> repeated the pie with no ecn test:
>
> http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/377727
>
> turned off ecn for a fq_codel test on the tcp itself:
>
> http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/377765
>
> and for this fq_codel test, dropped the inbound shaper from 115 mbit
> down to 110, which did improve matters somewhat.
>
> http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/377786
>
>
> [1] both ns2_codel and cake are experimental
> --
> Dave Täht
> Open Networking needs **Open Source Hardware**
>
> https://plus.google.com/u/0/+EricRaymond/posts/JqxCe2pFr67
--
Dave Täht
Open Networking needs **Open Source Hardware**
https://plus.google.com/u/0/+EricRaymond/posts/JqxCe2pFr67
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-04-30 4:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-04-27 21:28 Dave Taht
2015-04-27 22:56 ` Dave Taht
2015-04-28 6:59 ` jb
2015-04-27 22:58 ` Jonathan Morton
2015-04-30 4:47 ` Dave Taht [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='CAA93jw7HwRkJa9J9mS-LsTs+7heK3_C3g8LgC4MYqhQ=FBgCNg@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=dave.taht@gmail.com \
--cc=bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net \
--cc=justin@dslr.net \
/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