From: Dave Taht <dave@taht.net>
To: "Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@toke.dk>
Cc: Fabian Ruffy <fruffy@cs.ubc.ca>, cake@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: [Cake] Emulating Bufferbloat
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2018 13:30:07 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87pnuwby1s.fsf@taht.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87r2fczuue.fsf@toke.dk> ("Toke \=\?utf-8\?Q\?H\=C3\=B8iland-J\?\= \=\?utf-8\?Q\?\=C3\=B8rgensen\=22's\?\= message of "Thu, 22 Nov 2018 22:05:29 +0100")
Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@toke.dk> writes:
> Fabian Ruffy <fruffy@cs.ubc.ca> writes:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> this is a somewhat esoteric question. I am trying to actually force bufferbloat
>> in an emulation setup I am using. I set up a dumbbell topology and push traffic
>> through it, causing congestion at the central link. I use this setup to compare
>> congestion avoidance algorithms such as DCTCP to other solutions.
>> This has worked nicely with the 4.18 kernel. However, after upgrading to 4.19 I
>> cannot reproduce bufferbloat anymore. The traffic (even UDP packets) is
>> perfectly rate limited and I never see any congestion happening. This is great,
>> but in practice it prevents me from prototyping algorithms.
>
> Ha, that's awesome! :D
I have not upgraded to this branch. And in general I do recomend using a
separate box. "Nuke it from orbit, it's the only way to be *sure*".
However, recently I was able to get bufferbloat by using network
namespaces for my test, and perhaps that "still works"?
In this extremely long thread there's a test setup of network namespaces
you can try:
https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/9725
>
>> My interface configuration for bottlenecked links is:
>>
>> qdisc tbf 5: dev OBcbnsw1-eth2 root refcnt 2 rate 10Mbit burst 15000b lat
>> 12.0ms
>> Sent 6042 bytes 51 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 0)
>> backlog 0b 0p requeues 0
>> qdisc netem 10: dev OBcbnsw1-eth2 parent 5:1 limit 500
>> Sent 6042 bytes 51 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 0)
>> backlog 0b 0p requeues 0
>>
>>
>> I have the suspicion that it is related to the CAKE changes in the 4.19 kernel,
>> but I am not exactly sure. I am not using tc cake at all. Do you maybe know
>> what could cause this behavior? Apologies if this is the wrong mailing
>> list.
>
> My guess would be changes in the TCP stack; can't point you to anything
> specific off the top of my head, though...
>
> -Toke
> _______________________________________________
> Cake mailing list
> Cake@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-11-22 21:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-11-22 20:28 Fabian Ruffy
2018-11-22 21:05 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2018-11-22 21:30 ` Dave Taht [this message]
2018-11-22 21:15 ` Stephen Hemminger
2018-11-22 22:56 ` Fabian Ruffy
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://lists.bufferbloat.net/postorius/lists/cake.lists.bufferbloat.net/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87pnuwby1s.fsf@taht.net \
--to=dave@taht.net \
--cc=cake@lists.bufferbloat.net \
--cc=fruffy@cs.ubc.ca \
--cc=toke@toke.dk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox