From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lf0-x22a.google.com (mail-lf0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::22a]) (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 497CB3B25E for ; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 23:53:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-lf0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id b81so116915504lfe.1 for ; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 20:53:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=N6sHGnKDZ1ViyV9TSQsugal39enjfpWvLVlMzpqFofY=; b=hosNz9emFWnL3zW6DkvNH9Bnnh5E/Fnr/enkBlnZvAAH/wZM6IB5260cdQ62puUm0/ ZcfNDzlYYK0/1Tu0BmOSf4l8/LIYiWeMOVGAhgtUZGFabXKLwKWOoOC6R++KXL557nnP XTYODCbQDrcD6OTGkgVkv+ZmrC89qt9TDnlw4O73yR3Ina4F7e/6fNfqb2WiBG6F2zhi xzO0oPsm5qA4bZD7QLlZ+QZh8dghfmWTcgpQbfPr8CdKLK0UjssYyEejDOVcLV8l6o79 7zmjsAodjlkAzTJ/tZ6De6PbZ6ZdKjk0bBVUgb32/6PtliwVFpx8TNEh+TqScI7ysJDZ tz6g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=N6sHGnKDZ1ViyV9TSQsugal39enjfpWvLVlMzpqFofY=; b=DhTTFx+znGZus5bDsNOUXc0HsWN3zQhzv9Ig7jbbF1su1klgTUkf/+LSbFGQXReXqJ yoDAgntfuRQ2bklhWn8nKRbH9MLCPNQ9llRWAeIhoGgCrGtatnUQbdKChZIVzPAWaynQ A3CuvrGcBBi7vw0jmbxxzOBoqjhdHu3NH4+srg+DvRn6Y18kPPA3wNhFj7eQ2T7TUMGV 4MuJBzYRKHyDBVsmbcc4g6G3Kmd5iyzxsHiBfSiEKeawDTJ6Er3OEjA/RXWK2IsHJO7U HlViQvSmoLOsD94wM8sqknaecBQdpnJX+WGt/F3urtBM7isINJFUufEcMwFQw9ZauJxW Hj7A== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngveJuMayz53xbZNMNasvp2DmBYQBdwe6xQBllfqz2SFP1srpDfwzGBGNpp9Rie3I6spAcfPFBMhU0MXkgQ== X-Received: by 10.194.72.197 with SMTP id f5mr2197109wjv.166.1477022004401; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 20:53:24 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: justinbeech@gmail.com Received: by 10.28.207.134 with HTTP; Thu, 20 Oct 2016 20:53:23 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: jb Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 14:53:23 +1100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: dOz4wHAZ2TQ3NC4QnTdpdcLIIcs Message-ID: To: Alec Robertson Cc: bloat Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bd92196e5db17053f57fb75 Subject: Re: [Bloat] Large decrease in speed needed to combat 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: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 03:53:26 -0000 --047d7bd92196e5db17053f57fb75 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Regarding bloat testing ping on my test at dslreports.com it is done with web sockets so is sensitive to a) how busy the single threaded javascript engine in the browser is b) whether you are using https or http The degree of vagueness depends on browser and CPU speed and how fast your connection is generally however I would not suggest that it is as accurate as a UDP or ICMP ping given the above factors. thanks -Justin On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 6:21 PM, Alec Robertson wrote: > I'm on a TalkTalk FTTC connection in the UK, with a sync speed of > 58976Kbps, via a Billion 8800NL in bridge mode to my TP-LINK Archer C7 > (currently running LEDE r1348) with sqm-scripts 1.0.7-1 and > mod-sched-cake 4.4.15+2016-06-29-747..5-1. > > I have selected cake as the qdisc and piece_of_cake.qos as the queue setup > script. > > I've managed to get bufferbloat under control, with only 3-4ms of added > ping when downloading but I've had to set the ingress to 43000, reducing my > speed not hugely but more than I might have expected. > > On the upload side I'm syncing at 10422Kbps and the egress is set to 9300, > so not quite as bad. Bufferbloat here is also under control, at maybe 2-3ms > when downloading. > > Is there anything I can do to reclaim more of the download speed? How can > I diagnose this? > > The other question I would like to ask is, what's the absolute best way to > see what the ping maximum actually is? With speedtest.net the ping only > increases 1-2ms (pinging bbc.co.uk) and the same is true for > dslreports.com (maybe a little bit higher, maximum of about 5ms) but on > the dslreports.com site it says 9ms+ at times? > > Thanks. > -- > Alec Robertson > > _______________________________________________ > Bloat mailing list > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat > > --047d7bd92196e5db17053f57fb75 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Regarding bloat testing ping on my test at dslreports.com it is done with web sockets so is sen= sitive to
a) how busy the single threaded javascript engine in the brow= ser is
b) whether you are using https or http
The degre= e of vagueness depends on browser and CPU speed and how fast your connectio= n is generally however I would not suggest that it is as accurate as a UDP = or ICMP ping given the above factors.

thanks
=
-Justin

On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 6:21 PM, Alec Robertson &l= t;alecrobert= son13@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm on a TalkTalk FTTC connection in the UK, with a sync = speed of 58976Kbps, via a Billion 8800NL in bridge mode to my TP-LINK Arche= r C7 (currently running LEDE r1348) with sqm-scripts 1.0.7-1 and mod-sched-= cake=C2=A04.4.15+2016-06-29-747..5-1.

I have select= ed cake as the qdisc and piece_of_cake.qos as the queue setup script.
=

I've managed to get bufferbloat under control, with= only 3-4ms of added ping when downloading but I've had to set the ingr= ess to 43000, reducing my speed not hugely but more than I might have expec= ted.

On the upload side I'm syncing at 10422Kb= ps and the egress is set to 9300, so not quite as bad. Bufferbloat here is = also under control, at maybe 2-3ms when downloading.

Is there anything I can do to reclaim more of the download speed? How ca= n I diagnose this?

The other question I would like= to ask is, what's the absolute best way to see what the ping maximum a= ctually is? With speedte= st.net the ping only increases 1-2ms (pinging bbc.co.uk) and the same is true for dslreports.com (maybe a little b= it higher, maximum of about 5ms) but on the dslreports.com site it says 9ms+ at times?

Thanks.

--
Alec Robertson


_______________________________________________
Bloat mailing list
Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net<= /a>
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat

--047d7bd92196e5db17053f57fb75--