From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qk0-x22f.google.com (mail-qk0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::22f]) (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 D7C8C3CB79 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 07:37:28 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-qk0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id s68so2271934qkh.3 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 04:37:28 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=nXSZI4bryMgRVBy+Bb468vpsfmH01TdZ7Y7NeobImec=; b=Anqr56LJ8KFt04irIYxJWnPH9UK8x+Ov7x4pIfweUVt0K+lK4LR1YKg8rJ4Wj7JV4y lfpwbDseLf/bDUqM7DaDBpsn7yZxdvT0NuyMpibNV2X0TwYx1MbWUrd9TOPNKw38BmsL iGbsicOsySGd0h5gYPh2RA6G6tm5c1+Vcpgz0E0YlbgbR6jkn711IUb+9OebBAqmq78x VMBbd567fQ2F1SRK+N7Ef5YBRIMXRXUSEAndPkBnR5oomrY/KqddPpkGEzwlx1JF92d0 4r8VSC+vrrhLPVodQo1pRfk33qJj985OJnBEIU8hpKfzCIY25x4II/bxrt8EQudTMIhx 94Dg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:content-type:mime-version:subject:from :in-reply-to:date:cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references :to; bh=nXSZI4bryMgRVBy+Bb468vpsfmH01TdZ7Y7NeobImec=; b=iuzlPM7jbnNLtDATPgNSQrHab8wezcGg9R07kRGgOY10tSqOMxxkifTQmMnAXcRZVi ttp3AWoa3IWYAaLF0BHKVyPQY/hbvW2Etvg4vrf9jrnFH2nJYw3AvRIx9ZUm8IrOiEWd jJWzdQwj/pFpReO8CwBmkwu+gEAaBbJQ7ABnKEwdnKMty3ZaQmsEv8AoGtIfUgvUEfHQ aYXh8pf32OOCCTUwQ2kqZm4HyIkuScu03JRaM2EjWh4IvRDwkKIHhbBtOUY2oJnLJ58I zSpKgSsX2gycXrheVzpLGYl2YOs5+D43x1a52RilH857q4HSJi2HO5/H6+ntS1jKyg90 sL7g== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQl39G62RryXAenLHjy3EtwW8tFjk0fZ3YQMHvBmKy2b5lcdO/exekmQwrlDtvsGasheWvfXa9CGlyO2lhuCMlYxGBXPPA== X-Received: by 10.55.21.143 with SMTP id 15mr43481319qkv.74.1453293448346; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 04:37:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from richs-mbp-394.lan (pool-64-222-224-2.port.east.myfairpoint.net. [64.222.224.2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c34sm14131286qgc.14.2016.01.20.04.37.27 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 20 Jan 2016 04:37:27 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\)) From: Rich Brown In-Reply-To: <893CBD83-58AB-407E-864D-B47F0B8D0334@gmx.de> Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 07:37:25 -0500 Cc: Brandon Applegate , Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <893CBD83-58AB-407E-864D-B47F0B8D0334@gmx.de> To: moeller0 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104) Subject: Re: [Bloat] Getting started with sqm-scripts - latency good, bandwidth decimated 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: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 12:37:28 -0000 Hi Brandon, One more (very) simple test - what are your speeds *without* any = SQM/shaping? I didn't see it mentioned in your report, and let's be sure = that you're shaping the traffic to the actual achievable link speeds... I recently helped a friend whose "15 mbps/1mbps" DSL just wouldn't get = above ~725kbps up without inducing latency/bloat. It turns out that the = uplink could only achieve 3/4 of its "rated" speed.=20 Best, Rich > On Jan 20, 2016, at 6:30 AM, moeller0 wrote: >=20 > Hi Brandon, >=20 >=20 >> On Jan 20, 2016, at 00:33 , Brandon Applegate = wrote: >>=20 >> Disclaimer: if this is the wrong list for such a question - let me = know. This is specifically about the sqm-scripts package... >>=20 >> Hello, >>=20 >> I=E2=80=99ve been reading all I can on the bufferbloat website and = also trying to understand the evolution of the various scripts (debloat, = sqm, etc). >>=20 >> I managed to get sqm-scripts on my firewall (Ubuntu linux on a PC - = no *wrt etc). Got it built with the =E2=80=98linux=E2=80=99 platform. = Since this is Ubuntu 12.04 - I had to cheat a bit and pull down the = iproute2 source from 14.04. I=E2=80=99ve tweaked the main sqm script to = reflect this for the tc bindary - this is working. I also updated my = kernel to a later version that supports fq_codel. >=20 > Great, could I convince you to post a quick description of the = required steps somewhere linkeable on the net (in case we actually get = it to work correctly first ;) ) >=20 >>=20 >> My topology is =E2=80=98on a stick=E2=80=99. I have one gig = interface to a managed switch, on which are eth0.666 (outside/wan) and = eth0.10 (inside). >=20 > Okay, that is a configuration that has not received much testing = in the past=E2=80=A6 >=20 >>=20 >> I have 30/5 cable service, and have tried both those values as well = as 90% in my /etc/sqm/*conf file. >>=20 >> I=E2=80=99ve tried both eth0 (raw/parent interface) as well as = eth0.666. >=20 > Eth0 is not going to work in that situation as you will send and = receive both incoming and outgoing traffic on that interface, so we = really need to configure it correctly on the VLAN interfaces. I would = like to propose to start with egress/uplink first and handle ingress = afterwards. If you select eth0.666 (the superstitious among us would = probably try a different VLAN number ;) ) and only configure the upload = bandwidth but set download to 0, effectively sqm will only try to shape = the egress traffic. I would propose to try this first, if that works = let=E2=80=99s tackle download/ingress okay? >=20 >>=20 >> No matter what I do - my bandwidth is 10% of what it should be. =20 >=20 > Here a comprehensive list what you actually did might help to = form educated hypothesis what is going on... >=20 >> I get approx. 3/4mbit down + 2/3mbit up on dslreports speedtest. = Bufferbloat looks great though - A+. >=20 > Mmmh, while I would love to declare success (bufferbloat = quashed, let=E2=80=99s move on) I have a hunch you are not too impressed = with that solution ;) >=20 >>=20 >> Is there something inherent I=E2=80=99m doing wrong ? =20 >=20 > No, by all means you are doing the right thing, namely helping = us making sqm robust under more different conditions, thanks. >=20 >=20 >> Something to do with my =E2=80=98on a stick=E2=80=99 topology biting = me ? =20 >=20 > Could be, but nobody knows. >=20 >> Kernel version (Ubuntu=E2=80=99s 3.13.0-74-generic btw). >>=20 >> Thanks in advance for any help or info (or pointer to a more = appropriate list). >=20 > We recently taught sqm a whole new level of verbosity, please = have a look at Readme.md on https://github.com/tohojo/sqm-scripts , I = believe under non openwrt systems you might need to set: > [ -z "$SQM_VERBOSITY" ] && SQM_VERBOSITY=3D$VERBOSITY_DEBUG > instead of the default: > [ -z "$SQM_VERBOSITY" ] && SQM_VERBOSITY=3D$VERBOSITY_INFO > and then issue: > /usr/bin/sqm/sqm-bin stop > /usr/bin/sqm/sqm-bin start > manually to get more verbose output, You could also try setting = SQM_DEBUG unconditionally to 1 in defaults.sh (in addition to raising = the default log level to SQM_DEBUG) to get debug logs under: > /var/run/sqm/eth0.666.debug.log > or similar. That ideally will contain all debug output as well as all = calls to the tc and ip and iptables binaries and their output, which = should be plenty information to figure out the root cause of your = issues. >=20 > Best Regards > Sebastian >=20 >=20 >>=20 >> -- >> Brandon Applegate - CCIE 10273 >> PGP Key fingerprint: >> 830B 4802 1DD4 F4F9 63FE B966 C0A7 189E 9EC0 3A74 >> "SH1-0151. This is the serial number, of our orbital gun." >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> Bloat mailing list >> Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Bloat mailing list > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat