From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lf1-x12c.google.com (mail-lf1-x12c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::12c]) (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 0A7993BA8E for ; Thu, 6 Dec 2018 12:36:24 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-lf1-x12c.google.com with SMTP id p6so1000664lfc.1 for ; Thu, 06 Dec 2018 09:36:23 -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=2B9i4FF9rzm6JaV/5kNI/cncYrPCMsig88+jAoHRMsU=; b=fBjbd7NieOobtbsLB/t65wUeT8oJepVubM80dFBvUDgw0gP3SroV7FnDdyIKDCqlp5 Hd+Omp+y/l6ht1dDJx9w3iSQKMwZs9TqggqibHYr+gEmsHiXnWDfkLLSGKlyjz+KLjsQ nHUIqW0ew4j/WGTq0rfXkFKRqWdZLPzmKhHHYCVykKfMZtmci7epOFwRQ9xYvLTMPU91 BOBjx0WP/yu5u/m8UZ7P+ixjwSRB4nndRTFu1xyVlrCKIUjRgzKAS4x6c++e5haq3p+c F5FXmzWAIdjhUzqAF+LrE+IbS0RdfO6i1AK3/bmKSv+lnVlReJxOrHDjuM353pH9f9W3 5LQQ== 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=2B9i4FF9rzm6JaV/5kNI/cncYrPCMsig88+jAoHRMsU=; b=Kv/S5V+gBIxHzJGWcEqkkOJsTTvmT3Nf8rAK+bGHdNvF5mx4Koyo3dLqSSRCaMnKfW vQZDlsNSwX6nB4hKUQvrTw2eIceeEVCf31hhDNwzp+9oQfL4788BJMRIBp6o7YV+y/2U rlYypUH1bfOtHx2YeNnv+C1cDXIAUQF9W9+zOAW3ir9iRQkHrEch8wi3e2jJ2wnkTwJv JBtH1GCPSqg8lpSP9O5iYWeFR7K/KNgHKvPDBBc/Gg/D17zASNDDLIVU8B5bjG9vBFvS qX6ZNjo0In+ZEXFf0No/N+QcLghzgWE/7POvYDIczphB1f7py8iGLWzCDkZG4sCobCkb gssA== X-Gm-Message-State: AA+aEWbqIPLZVCI6fWNRHBCtV5S+b7D5ZlFXkjQz1LoywTRffut9D70F wzOXWTVj1CzyeR3Uf01pltY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AFSGD/XQqngrStQfQQOd1csDlGH/9JD5jePxLMI9DrUo5Ele81Xqe+3BZlblpBja1SG1X9UwihxahA== X-Received: by 2002:a19:5a05:: with SMTP id o5mr18577283lfb.140.1544117782799; Thu, 06 Dec 2018 09:36:22 -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 g66sm178608lfe.42.2018.12.06.09.36.21 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 06 Dec 2018 09:36:21 -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: <271B3584-068F-4FED-B037-B8E920A9EE55@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2018 19:36:19 +0200 Cc: Dave Taht , dave@taht.net, cake@lists.bufferbloat.net Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <70BDD881-B509-43FE-81BB-E9C4B1145FA1@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> <271B3584-068F-4FED-B037-B8E920A9EE55@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: Thu, 06 Dec 2018 17:36:24 -0000 >> 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. >=20 > I await these with interest. I noticed that some progress has been made here already, in particular I = can now see cwnd graphs which make a very interesting datapoint when = directly compared with the throughput and queue-occupancy graphs. It's = now definitely clear that the senders are using TCP Reno or some close = variant thereof. In fact, the three graphs are mutually inconsistent. Aside from the = sharp cwnd reduction events, the cwnd of all the flows increases roughly = linearly over time, but the throughput remains flat while the queue is = almost always empty (for Codel and COBALT). This can only be explained = if there's a hidden queue at the bottleneck, perhaps associated with the = simulated NIC immediately downstream of the AQM. I would suggest checking the simulation setup carefully for hidden = queues of this sort. - Jonathan Morton