From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-x236.google.com (mail-wm0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::236]) (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 DBA083B29E for ; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 15:35:09 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-wm0-x236.google.com with SMTP id l141so2085605wmg.1 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 12:35:09 -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=G4yLZJfEWnTSov+bfSipK1seb8es/+/qyp49yUFoDxA=; b=fKOT+cHBDuO2ZZdx7dT07TjhrnxJIXpZTqh4YJQ3dY+oYbQL7xYCrWf8+JAizbpRdE BgPQwyDeyUqrantx7sBkuO2swzqdtFXeUc67zRJUOYX0gJpiFRAQeXLo9a2jvwgyGXap LKIsCirUxfV90n/u77ptVeT/4Cy0cdQsrIowPK0YqmRd9n8XmVsRQlYEg2/9l7Fykl/1 YqmB0lmYEQ8HNRvvhn3cUc5cAUByRVrL9tqifdzQ/0Ijvgkhbeprb0eHzzR+9zYDrTst 77ZMwj+Grbuk1Kcy4nHoS9JlbyfdZdeuiPaaLkkNKNrOsETMu5zwvAXXXV77CVnRJwPu lrcw== 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=G4yLZJfEWnTSov+bfSipK1seb8es/+/qyp49yUFoDxA=; b=YyRb584O7fQzW0GrOOIpnY2Jtz+aSLTK6H4kv1qPtDrUvewFOfSqxTv39Gl3E5hDu7 zsq6S1K6i8ivgHwOXr8pgc9077/3Yjs88L5HeL7/xdq9rUrYnA6v2BkpMSRnq3SldTcy qslNQBJkImLs7fcFqITKnZQc3IMoczthRtrDS/25Tqv/v+nUWITwYq2cNTzJ8kKdjpsi 0f/qQu2QiAF/F/27GXKHRuBVz+NYE176VBUXzKXv2b9SoP8tUyQ3exuxqbFvZB8pzKi3 3AsCuB0hkiFbrH0W2afEcKjpHYKQjo//3v0HXUv/Xs21Tc23GeSFDnpX9z+S4eoIQHOF //TQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX40XJ7dNhFVRS+ijWZW8nr3+BUqsOg+4efDrhbSjrNLA7fYY52I iWo9OqwVB1h/khGOqn6kcSo= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMYE51H8qODxi3uk9K1MreVicDvZVrAWuKGt8KB0+/GwxdjPLut9qHc1HE6PNgsFRCcGnDHrJg== X-Received: by 10.28.190.12 with SMTP id o12mr671765wmf.148.1511901308974; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 12:35:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.72.0.130] (h-1169.lbcfree.net. [185.99.119.68]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i8sm36378wrb.29.2017.11.28.12.35.08 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 28 Nov 2017 12:35:08 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) From: Pete Heist In-Reply-To: <87zi76xlw5.fsf@nemesis.taht.net> Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 21:35:06 +0100 Cc: Cake List Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <6F2894AD-87EA-4EFC-918E-625E49EDA977@gmail.com> References: <745FEC66-95A7-40E1-A8FA-57714D3AB6AC@gmail.com> <87zi76xlw5.fsf@nemesis.taht.net> To: Dave Taht X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) Subject: Re: [Cake] cake flenter results round 2 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: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 20:35:10 -0000 > On Nov 28, 2017, at 8:07 PM, Dave Taht wrote: >=20 > Pete Heist writes: >=20 >> *** Round 3 Plans: >>=20 >> * Use netem to test a spread of simulated rtts and bandwidths. >=20 > Since you are leveraging a few too few boxes, attached are my current > scripts for fiddling a bit with network namespaces. I added individual > ssh, irtt, etc, servers so that things like flent's ssh stuff should > just work for polling stats. You mean a few too few virtual boxes, not necessarily physical ones, = right? :) In other words, there are different topologies that can be = used for testing. In your scripts you=E2=80=99re simulating "Internet = access", where client is the family or organization for example and = server is stuff on the Internet: client - middlebox - delay - server In my earlier point-to-point WiFi testing I was simulating an ISP=E2=80=99= s backhaul: client - client_router - station ----- ap - server_router - server In my current testing I=E2=80=99m simulating, well, something far less = useful if I think about it- two boxes blasting traffic to one another = over a cable and trying to improve queueing delays between them: client - client_router --- server_router - server I hadn=E2=80=99t realized how heavy-weight traffic generation for = anything beyond 4/4 flows would be at Gbit rates, or how confusing and = trivial some of these results would be. So beyond just my vague idea to =E2=80=9Csimulate a spread of rtts and = bandwidths=E2=80=9D, I see I need a topology change to produce something = more useful. I think there are still two options: 1) Point-to-point WiFi again, where I=E2=80=99d be using two NSM5s and = testing over short range at rates of up to 100 Mbps. I would probably = try to get FreeNet=E2=80=99s APU version 1 boxes into action again so = I=E2=80=99d have physical devices for each of the six roles above. I = wish I didn=E2=80=99t have to use those RTL8111Es, but that=E2=80=99s = how it is. 2) Your =E2=80=9CInternet access=E2=80=9D setup. Either I can get the = veth stuff into action on a single physical APU2 (powerful enough?), or = I can try to set up four physical boxes with the same topology (or if I = were tricky, try to spread the four roles across two boxes). #1 would be useful for FreeNet. Would it also be useful for Cake testing = in general, or would you prefer more #2 results at this stage (i.e. = simulating dsl, cable, satellite, etc)?