From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-s66.mailgun.info (mail-s66.mailgun.info [184.173.153.194]) (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 60A343CB35 for ; Thu, 3 Jan 2019 16:38:26 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; v=1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=flamingpc.com; q=dns/txt; s=pic; t=1546551506; h=Content-Type: To: Subject: Message-ID: Date: From: MIME-Version: Sender; bh=NZNjWhOOaYMeQPy033yarVvHQiffAxTJbIPLd+WCxZc=; b=Gt/U9Hv02Mi2wDhUcBJNe+jkQ01ioS34QVwF+dzzYJj3v4YqsO6cf5z/DhDne53e+OFWoIAE qDCyE1xOyoFt3VcE+ZHXQg9SaKq66yAqUQcrsUgJCXqAVnWhxsXdMCHOvDMDeW60jJUwHwYP /ATRpjcHgfpjkQPLWaG35yCfGxg= X-Mailgun-Sending-Ip: 184.173.153.194 X-Mailgun-Sid: WyJiMjA5OSIsICJibG9hdEBsaXN0cy5idWZmZXJibG9hdC5uZXQiLCAiNjY0ODllNyJd Sender: bufferbloat@flamingpc.com Received: from mail-vk1-f177.google.com (mail-vk1-f177.google.com [209.85.221.177]) by mxa.mailgun.org with ESMTP id 5c2e80d0.7f155c3efbb0-smtp-out-n03; Thu, 03 Jan 2019 21:38:24 -0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-vk1-f177.google.com with SMTP id h128so7550600vkg.11 for ; Thu, 03 Jan 2019 13:38:24 -0800 (PST) X-Gm-Message-State: AJcUukeBsaZ+tPCCwnd+Z5CQ4pGqHcxJKILrnAwTCTM4lyY7XE1J+EDg u+LneobQjf0J5J2OEOFf6uWkMBinBwHlwQC6jV0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN7c0tIp4CVpMMVDVtLL2sIc6uJ0JHppf4kv72MtqomOE8syzHyQw8XZ557KzG8phK0gXccZTnzY55yoIh8SR2c= X-Received: by 2002:a1f:4982:: with SMTP id w124mr17511296vka.4.1546551503852; Thu, 03 Jan 2019 13:38:23 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: cloneman Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2019 16:38:12 -0500 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: To: bloat Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000039ac8057e949500" Subject: [Bloat] Does VDSL interleaving+FEC help bufferbloat? 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: Thu, 03 Jan 2019 21:38:26 -0000 --000000000000039ac8057e949500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Interleaving on DSL is enabled by many providers which allegedly provides some packet loss protection at the cost of some latency. I think it's designed mainly Layer 1 line noise, but now I'm wondering if it might also translate to other benefits, even on a clean DSL line that doesn't *need* interleave. Question: Is interleaving protective of packet loss due to momentary spikes on the downloads? I tested it a bit with the help of my ISP VDSL: Interleave+FEC On (15ms first hop) 3% packet loss on steam download stress Interleave+FEC OFF (4ms first hop) 5-6% packet loss on steam download stress With fq_codel: (-15% bw) Both had 0.3% packet loss (very good) on steam Download stress Of note, steam downloads used to break fq_codel for me (20 flows split evenly is how they designed it *sigh*) but it appears that it's working well now, perhaps steam *finally* fixed their stuff. Steam stress is performed by downloading any of their free games with their client software e.g. Dota2. tl-dr; interesting to test weather interleave+FEC, a technology designed for layer 1 noise, can help with layer 3 ingress contention for resources. Also, I found a guy who designed a layer 3 FEC protocol designed for terrible connections: https://github.com/wangyu-/tinyfecVPN If anyone wants to comment on that, I think it's nice to know that it exists. --000000000000039ac8057e949500 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Interleaving on DSL is en= abled by many providers which allegedly provides some packet loss protectio= n at the cost of some latency.

I think it's d= esigned mainly Layer 1 line noise, but now I'm wondering if it might al= so translate to other benefits, even on a clean DSL line that doesn't *= need* interleave.

Question:
Is interleaving protective= of packet loss due to momentary spikes on the downloads?

I tested it a bit=C2=A0 with the help of my ISP=C2=A0

VDSL:
Interleave+FEC On (15ms first hop) 3% packet loss on steam= download stress
Interleave+FEC OFF (= 4ms first hop) 5-6% packet loss on steam download stress=C2=A0=C2=A0

With fq_codel: (-15% bw)
Both had 0.3% packet loss (very good) on stea= m Download stress=C2=A0

Of note, steam downloads used to break fq_co= del for me (20 flows split evenly is how they designed it *sigh*) but it ap= pears that it's working well now, perhaps steam *finally* fixed their s= tuff. Steam stress is performed by downloading any of their free games with= their client software e.g. Dota2.
tl-dr; interesting to test weather i= nterleave+FEC, a technology designed for layer 1 noise, can help with layer= 3 ingress contention for resources.

Also, I found a guy who designe= d a layer 3 FEC protocol designed for terrible connections:=C2=A0https://github.co= m/wangyu-/tinyfecVPN

If anyone wants to comment on that, I think= it's nice to know that it exists.
--000000000000039ac8057e949500--