From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.19]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mout.gmx.net", Issuer "TeleSec ServerPass DE-1" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5590221F56B for ; Thu, 4 Sep 2014 00:04:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from u-089-cab204a2.am1.uni-tuebingen.de ([134.2.89.3]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx003) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MegbQ-1XjJO61l6m-00OF9o; Thu, 04 Sep 2014 09:04:18 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) From: Sebastian Moeller In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2014 09:04:18 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <87ppfijfjc.fsf@toke.dk> <4FF4917C-1B6D-4D5F-81B6-5FC177F12BFC@gmail.com> <4DA71387-6720-4A2F-B462-2E1295604C21@gmail.com> <0DB9E121-7073-4DE9-B7E2-73A41BCBA1D1@gmail.com> <0D3E3220-C12A-4238-974B-D83D13EF354E@gmail.com> <83C39F40-5D07-43B4-8D3A-5A087CCB2735@gmx.de> To: =?windows-1252?Q?Dave_T=E4ht?= X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:GF/HWYeprABCubgl3iNT1Asj2SA9aQeHCI9WoVAsoCHM2s5bdhq URND8P7lQGD46LD5GAfOPhPKUU1DB8kblC47bHjtMBII1mwwl7e3Kz8MEB6y3eb/d4ELe8z MO76T5UCM4Y5CV2T43gOYybEjkOQUvYkIoHjUFrFWPjKTS3O8n8Crv1RcjwJjeZcNBr06J+ P3A92Yn/Fy2PXRGJnMNug== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1; Cc: "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" , bloat Subject: Re: [Bloat] [Cerowrt-devel] Comcast upped service levels -> WNDR3800 can't cope... X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2014 07:04:55 -0000 Hi Dave, On Sep 3, 2014, at 21:30 , Dave Taht wrote: > On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Sebastian Moeller = wrote: >> Hi Aaron, >>=20 >>=20 >> On Sep 3, 2014, at 17:12 , Aaron Wood wrote: >>=20 >>> On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 4:08 AM, Jonathan Morton = wrote: >>> Given that the CPU load is confirmed as high, the pcap probably = isn't as useful. The rest would be interesting to look at. >>>=20 >>> Are you able to test with smaller packet sizes? That might help to = isolate packet-throughput (ie. connection tracking) versus = byte-throughput problems. >>>=20 >>> - Jonathan Morton >>>=20 >>> Doing another test setup will take a few days (maybe not until the = weekend). But I can get the data uploaded, and do some preliminary = crunching on it. >>=20 >> So the current SQM system allows to shape on multiple = interfaces, so you could set up the shaper on se00 and test between sw10 = and se00 (should work if you reliably get fast enough wifi connection, = something like combined shaped bandwidth <=3D 70% of wifi rate should = work). That would avoid the whole firewall and connection tracking = logic. >> My home wifi environment is quite variable/noisy and not = well-suited for this test: with rrul_be I got stuck at around 70Mbps = combined bandwidth, with different distributions of the up and down-leg = for no-shaping, shaping to 50Mbps10Mbps, and shaping to 100Mbps50Mbps. = SIRQ got pretty much pegged at 96-99% during all netperf-wrapper runs, = so I assume this to be the bottleneck (the radio was in the > 200mbps = range during the test with occasional drops to 150mbps). So my = conclusion would: be it really is the shaping that is limited on my = wndr3700v2 with cerowrt 3.10.50-1, again if I would be confident about = the measurement which I am not (but EOUTOFTIME). That or my rf = environment might only allow for roughly 70-80Mbps combined throughput. = For what it is worth: test where performed between macbook running = macosx 10.9.4 and hp proliant n54l running 64bit openSuse 13.1, kernel = 3.11.10-17 (AMD turion with tg3 gbit ethernet adapter (BQL enabled), = running fq_codel on eth0), with sha >> ping on the se00 interface. >=20 >=20 > A note on wifi throughput. CeroWrt routes, rather than bridges, > between interfaces. So I would expect for simple benchmarks, openwrt > (which bridges) might show much better wifi<-> ethernet behavior. Interesting, I just tried to make quick and dirty test with the = goal of getting rid of NAT and fire-walling from the test path, so I am = very happy that cerowrt routes by default. That way shaping on se00 is = quite a good test of the internet routing performance. >=20 > We route, rather than bridge wifi, because of 1) it made it easier to > debug it, and 2) the theory that multicast on busier networks messes > up wifi far more than not-bridging slows it down. I am already sold on this idea! I think there should be a good = reason to call it a =93home router=94 and not a home bridge ;) (though = some of the stock firmwares make me feel someone =93had a bridge to = sell=94 ;) ) > Have not accumulated > a lot of proof of this, but this > was kind of enlightening: > = http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-desmouceaux-ipv6-mcast-wifi-power-usage-0= 0 >=20 > I note that my regular benchmarking environment has mostly been 2 or > more routers with nat and firewalling disabled. I would love to recreate that, but my home setup is not really = wired to test this (upstream of cerowrt sits only the 100Mbit switch of = the ISP=92s del modem/-router combination, so no way to plug in a faster = receiver there) >=20 > Given the trend towards looking at iptables and nat overhead on this > thread, an ipv6 benchmark on this box might be revealing. I would love to test this as well, but I have not gotten IPv6 to = work reliably at my home. Best Regards Sebastian IPv6 NOTE: Everyone with a real dual-stack IPv6 and IPv4 connection to = the internet (so not tunneled over IPv4) and an ATM-based DSL connection = (might be the empty set...) needs to use the htb-private method for link = layer adjustments, as the td-stab method currently does not take the = different header sizes for IPv4 and IPv6 into account (pure IPv6 = connections or where IPv4 is tunneled in IPv6 packets should be fine = they just need to increase the per packet overhead by 20 bytes over the = IPv4 recommendation=85). >=20 >> Best Regards >> Sebastian >>=20 >>=20 >>>=20 >>> -Aaron >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list >>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net >>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> Cerowrt-devel mailing list >> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel >=20 >=20 >=20 > --=20 > Dave T=E4ht >=20 > https://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/make-wifi-fast