From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from nm48-vm9.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com (nm48-vm9.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com [98.138.121.121]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8637B3B2A4 for ; Fri, 9 Dec 2016 14:20:47 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s2048; t=1481311247; bh=6P+2m4RUdKoJwaQ2CYNaPBguECa2NztCYXzyudJFWfY=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Subject:References:From:Subject; b=Y0UGtAFFtNUzENuWURnTtx5C9uocH8xlDn9bPN4JJRCFmyeDbbCUrHeLePrge/8nJw+LAvJcTh0+N3Pt78K7iaqPIj0VmTdjJVSqPDH+2nn4korh4Vl8b0/UEtC2tfzkkqha8Tju04poFm0RcsrrTeMtjJKcEKKtvE32JWikUG53a6BWMGCWrQLqzb5OEObgzStFPLrms05mKq7KjvYCbi7GvcSM21Alps1zgfb4PSu3CKZ0gT9NHaoarOzC88yQiwYGbbOSEZg8Pwvqtvn+kn2vO0NFAp3JwSLUeO0tDCg0NEsr3FCGHb6PDTOx3ONwZdFi3xlpHHR1QdHFMsc45w== Received: from [127.0.0.1] by nm48.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 09 Dec 2016 19:20:47 -0000 Received: from [98.138.226.179] by nm48.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 09 Dec 2016 19:13:43 -0000 Received: from [98.138.89.163] by tm14.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 09 Dec 2016 19:11:56 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1019.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 09 Dec 2016 19:11:56 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-4 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 349737.16132.bm@omp1019.mail.ne1.yahoo.com X-YMail-OSG: ZwATgowVM1lY1zUj7JWEdJ_ZCiW6RNadyBvPyPZHYKYVh99B5auCtXnnUdOyDsm NyF0t0.UAPe6UTDZP1GT5Sfc_1Ow5fsqFskZoptjvca1BQRhQvaZHNwPYpO2AOgpUFUE7W9n8t2I 6sYz0sxkBqPrwMDvfpWdx2oN6mm3xpjPmLp0upc.7tT6KEDq82fRUWmsq_b6SxtIA.hPia45BQGO gAqTkoWuPlWJ43GjaVDHrlFpFS.ygggfLsHwNkV8ZhNtUnl5ZWNgie8ChLJ5LH5FTNKVG7IELi42 RLTCN45hWWIRQUEe7s0jsPgZWsb9JjGxdLU8sEOY6xyEBplg_YLWy3yeAG3myFOStnvem6a5j6MO rOS2rJdKcSVwlEUHOvXcHYFyWojgbn5mJa9KjN5NWnNIL8hkOonviQ3Oc7.peEVgXWf7mbLbGbSn M96CjFW_LUZEx715JjMbxdpz3g2R9CQyCg0qAz6W_ysciSq.9OVjx.J3veb3wEVE6gj6Y9S_lJXE 6tQ_15Ar4DmQ55RgD1E6YW8P0kAAbXkHCGxLb708a Received: from jws200088.mail.ne1.yahoo.com by sendmailws130.mail.ne1.yahoo.com; Fri, 09 Dec 2016 19:11:55 +0000; 1481310715.965 Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2016 19:11:47 +0000 (UTC) From: George Amanakis Reply-To: George Amanakis To: "cake@lists.bufferbloat.net" Message-ID: <1462124589.1190968.1481310707746@mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <1462124589.1190968.1481310707746.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [Cake] WAN ingress rate with concurrent downloads X-BeenThere: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Cake - FQ_codel the next generation List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2016 19:20:47 -0000 Dear All, regarding the issue about WAN ingress rate with many concurrent TCP downloads, it seems that all the excess ingress rate on the WAN interface are TCP retransmission packets (Wireshark). After the latest commit 78ff814 in cobalt, ping times while using TCP BitTorrent improved from ~1000ms to ~300ms (concurrent connections 55). If I reduce the concurrent connections to 30 I get ping times lower than 70ms. Best regards, George