From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qk1-x72c.google.com (mail-qk1-x72c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::72c]) (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 4BD4E3B29D for ; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 21:22:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-qk1-x72c.google.com with SMTP id l17so17720111qki.9 for ; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 18:22:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=UEIZ0bTL3txRN1Zp+OdxWoQnEhuC93pjSvW+nlv4tmk=; b=rSTlUFstE1Bp/CXUF0gXDlmSwwGrYoxsi++LKVZryz+N7hqQK+fMXxT9ZIcuDvI2Ib j2hhe1uQeD80GX+udPDZLM7sSzCs6qZNn5G22jfjn2M47AWNIMRJ7xHeYi1dhm/o8+8P veaz9ukHD9IZvJ7IPyiv2Fwk3kAzJPoUECBmR5tgqz1PiuNPk5b0aNNm/TuSgn4Nvd8N HafmP2Vp3QOzrfAVF73nENwRJ69Gb1LffIBEwcBVy/c3l9ILB9tErA3blTVsH+EaOQ4j 48pNt9T04P/59tXAZDW9TRmgNsQOSTBvDxqCa5DhJqnSEI+RWS1GWsM2bEaW3MJWtEd9 LkKQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=UEIZ0bTL3txRN1Zp+OdxWoQnEhuC93pjSvW+nlv4tmk=; b=bmVwCN55CIbzhZsGEOyKiDWBkk6zGD5/k7F1HhxkRoxWRZAJvp6aAu577/Bl64/8dr G+6HEhOZqaSijC1nzwClJt+Jo5U5xsKwY3b0AZ0hFKcmkwIb9+VDaVF7InjWpaKmonWH FfC4KhmV8fhOJQNSdwJJCLQJlObmyrQZOy+flNswm7yQqiFsXlLF4giMzWOARHCRKZgw rlv6cnaDDfOQIVlceGfIZoUUmMeX/sg07zOTSPXq65kRZKbqQ/hPCwzRk/MKTh33aVhO 7wlEk4n8yAVque7PscCLJiqNGA6t7nZvq+tZFc3nzHEjhcO6C28397DErhR9mMkZl520 R4MQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532rXozbchueqPXapfdnUdfFSZCjoswmENnhYXCyEicRL1GbXUUJ 5JD1UrWOdPuuGCG5j89C9pgV7h53PbLoWCxn3aIlH9EA X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyFkxy4eGGfxVLMfedJ3iQT/aCEM4BRl2V9Eo49w357o8R57O7dweDlxCTNkEd/IkQx4XmIIuOGqlysnHjcmic= X-Received: by 2002:a37:4a0c:: with SMTP id x12mr18885272qka.229.1592270543799; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 18:22:23 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <87mu541ygy.fsf@toke.dk> In-Reply-To: <87mu541ygy.fsf@toke.dk> From: Sergio Belkin Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2020 22:22:11 -0300 Message-ID: To: =?UTF-8?B?VG9rZSBIw7hpbGFuZC1Kw7hyZ2Vuc2Vu?= Cc: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000264b5405a829602f" Subject: Re: [Bloat] Is still netperf a valid tool? 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: Tue, 16 Jun 2020 01:22:24 -0000 --000000000000264b5405a829602f Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable El lun., 15 jun. 2020 06:15, Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen escribi=C3=B3: > Sergio Belkin writes: > > > Hi, > > I've seen that many of the recommended tools to diagnose/troubleshoot > > bufferbloat use netperf. > > Netperf in https://github.com/HewlettPackard/netperf has many years of > > inactivity. In fact, in recent versions of distros don't include it. > > So, my question is: is still netperf a reliable tool? > > Reliable in the sense that it works and produces results that are likely > to be fairly close to the reality you want to measure? Absolutely. > Reliable in the sense that you can always rely on it being available? > Unfortunately not. > > The latter is more of a licensing issue, though, which unfortunately > also means that it is not likely to be fixed... :( > > -Toke > Thanks for tour kind answers --000000000000264b5405a829602f Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


El lun., 15 jun. 2020 06:15, Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8= rgensen <toke@toke.dk> escribi=C3= =B3:
Sergio Belkin <sebelk@gmail.c= om> writes:

> Hi,
> I've seen that many of the recommended tools to diagnose/troublesh= oot
> bufferbloat use netperf.
> Netperf in https://github.com/HewlettPack= ard/netperf has many years of
> inactivity. In fact, in recent versions of distros don't include i= t.
> So, my question is: is still netperf a reliable tool?

Reliable in the sense that it works and produces results that are likely to be fairly close to the reality you want to measure? Absolutely.
Reliable in the sense that you can always rely on it being available?
Unfortunately not.

The latter is more of a licensing issue, though, which unfortunately
also means that it is not likely to be fixed... :(

-Toke

Thanks for tour kind answers

--000000000000264b5405a829602f--