Re: [Bloat] RRUL for netperf (bad hack)

[Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>]

I am delighted to see this functionality in netperf, however hacky. We
could use to also do something tcp-like in udp, with timestamping like
this (perhaps using the SO_TIMESTAMPING api in linux for increased
accuracy on rx)...

Getting better tools, one patch at a time, one tool at a time, one
daemon at a time...

On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 10:04 AM, Bill Ver Steeg (versteb)
<versteb@cisco.com> wrote:
> Lars-
>
> Looking now - Thinking back, I probably hacked it in myself.  I do not see it on my road Linux laptop, so I will check on my servers when I am back in the office.
>
>
>
> Bill Ver Steeg
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eggert, Lars [mailto:lars@netapp.com]
> Sent: Friday, April 17, 2015 12:38 PM
> To: Bill Ver Steeg (versteb)
> Cc: bloat
> Subject: Re: RRUL for netperf (bad hack)
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2015-4-17, at 18:18, Bill Ver Steeg (versteb) <versteb@cisco.com> wrote:
>>
>> Iperf also has some one-way and two-way delay measurements (or at least the version I used last year did). It also put timestamps in the payload of the packets.
>
> got a pointer to that version of iperf? I only see some latency-related stuff for UDP flows.
>
> Thanks,
> Lars
> _______________________________________________
> Bloat mailing list
> Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat



-- 
Dave Täht
Open Networking needs **Open Source Hardware**

https://plus.google.com/u/0/+EricRaymond/posts/JqxCe2pFr67