From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lf1-x131.google.com (mail-lf1-x131.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::131]) (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 C4DCD3CB35 for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2018 09:24:03 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-lf1-x131.google.com with SMTP id l10so14834722lfh.9 for ; Wed, 05 Dec 2018 06:24:03 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=134F+E7ad1E3mo59ZQ3tkYmBAXutglWAy5JRbTl+1xU=; b=Qxu3wG/KiGRaolFZ88tbNdEMaCUCGNIzX/OIZF+vqn0ndGFRKXJgEvMV7+TFqK6rE6 rUUIYHDwtjLGSJOwZrkktvdV/QM+mbgOSiC6niuU2C/azJn8xiLoLI1RyBbYPsRbUqYZ zZhjNEXZKez/M2yqv9n3xbccM2qQAtIk06AWwfbvOyCRWj7PRbYgMlWylKTHTGlPSfZv R2CC2wsaul1e+lrbtUajWg5Tce+N6GJpaoL/9zTWT4y/Aqn/MtSjXO95quLZVT56/vly +mC2Wb8ng7a6KbyB+OVE6FTTOT7cxd0zfE5rlFxa8TIQTHchb0qzf8KTWtlWayz6FZK7 agLA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=134F+E7ad1E3mo59ZQ3tkYmBAXutglWAy5JRbTl+1xU=; b=IXe6uogYAvH5eil6sLrwsp3bX4TNMiqINClniGpl9CSo5R0N1aZKwGXuHmvU9Aotfu jcmC/9zBAJqlF5MYHn4sfjHg8RNtd+j2Kl5iR2P5EP3F4mcnyObpWf9oYTH5JaQKVewc Fax0PGLGIRlge48O0iKqNnf4X/ShKu20+VzHn27KfS1EixAhyFUHYZ9Uvrku504gcT63 08gv3p1tDaUfeNr7wmmm07b1R3OiporWxDw6PpV7USOVxXMKL2Ge/CkjmghhRu+Dk9e4 c9XYooKTmw9f60hViJcvXUc5Xu6yZylC1WqLMaLolcsrv46Ay/yCufWBi1OMX4z0dOvZ WKeA== X-Gm-Message-State: AA+aEWZQ6J7yMyS1nI+C8UlJr8HpHtYDeCbXOSlpgHscSo0G4bvXvS6V 3sDvFH4U9QtEaN/hFN0j+uM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AFSGD/Wjl+rDf+kqkoS1cCFsTEkoAYpa3f9GUcYO/kPc+0bAmFoWbxiGQCOYy8Q1IdH3r9trYADW7A== X-Received: by 2002:a19:d242:: with SMTP id j63mr15570393lfg.26.1544019842565; Wed, 05 Dec 2018 06:24:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from jonathartonsmbp.lan (83-245-238-21-nat-p.elisa-mobile.fi. [83.245.238.21]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q127-v6sm4153060ljq.45.2018.12.05.06.24.01 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 05 Dec 2018 06:24:01 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) From: Jonathan Morton In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2018 16:23:51 +0200 Cc: Dave Taht , dave@taht.net, cake@lists.bufferbloat.net Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <271B3584-068F-4FED-B037-B8E920A9EE55@gmail.com> References: <87va4nzsn4.fsf@taht.net> <6578A0D1-FF6A-474E-A6D5-98185F98CB45@gmail.com> <08381337-F99A-46D1-87AF-B0F71A8753BC@gmail.com> <949D58FF-9C2F-4516-8547-20A712EC0C92@gmail.com> To: Jendaipou Palmei X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) Subject: Re: [Cake] COBALT implementation in ns-3 with results under different traffic scenarios 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: Wed, 05 Dec 2018 14:24:04 -0000 > On 5 Dec, 2018, at 2:23 pm, Jendaipou Palmei = wrote: >=20 > We have uploaded the corresponding graphs for reference CoDel.=20 >=20 > Link: https://github.com/Daipu/COBALT/wiki/Drop-Count-Graph Quite a remarkable difference here - just look at the scales for the = corresponding graphs! I'm actually rather surprised to see reference = Codel reaching such deep activation states, when COBALT stays very = shallowly activated but is still effective. It makes me wonder whether = there's something odd going on with the ns3 version of Codel. I'm sure more insight will be gained from the actual drop traces. > We have also plotted the instantaneous throughput for all flows in = Light traffic scenario for COBALT and CoDel. > These graphs are plotted for packet size with 1000 bytes and 1500 = bytes. >=20 > Link: = https://github.com/Daipu/COBALT/wiki/Throughput-for-Separate-Flow This isn't quite what I was thinking of, but it's still interesting. I = was looking for all flows from a single run plotted on a single graph, = perhaps stacked so that their sum is visible as overall throughput. = That way, the interaction between one flow backing off and others taking = over its unused capacity becomes clearer, and it is possible to see if = more than one flow backs off at the same time (indicating that both got = hit by AQM). There are also sampling artefacts apparent in these graphs as rapid = oscillations around a mean value. You might want to look into ways to = eliminate or otherwise account for those. > We're currently working on the following: >=20 > 1. plots for the actual number of marks/drops per time interval for = COBALT, CoDel, and PIE. > 2. zoomed in plots on small time intervals to show the dynamic = behavior of the algorithm. > 3. a file showing the timestamp of each drop. I await these with interest. - Jonathan Morton