From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qk1-x729.google.com (mail-qk1-x729.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::729]) (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 AA36A3B2A4 for ; Tue, 4 Dec 2018 10:21:06 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-qk1-x729.google.com with SMTP id y78so9793058qka.12 for ; Tue, 04 Dec 2018 07:21:06 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=xNJjbqc7r9gQNFMlxN/is5W6GYeOGEz52v+v552v7XI=; b=gfj1H/naFGvgO8gzio5rODgYtFED/rbG2Zhr37QsGTcl8a28zdVk8xHjQ+R9aae+XS bv6q5wFxOMhXSofCxOi5Tx5x4HXaxC+g1odLNoa6IJj/Vu0zqd8rhA12fMo/LMPrNdGF kHJjS9ROsQerEu5RBrJOtQDpa7BaV6OPninNQ9D+JK3dwXdMyhXsP8gKyynT/tO+qJB5 sHaJwW4ETGC3WCc7Su2iN1ZCByjIl1f5XOobD6z8FaFwaqZrJXfWzaQhRKD1a5URvE9V rE3EKOGuOAmOPAdcQFq7uwwxACDfjxDoKG3Iui7onoFq+Xi7sFr+9p0IxTM9aKwQoqns Puzw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=xNJjbqc7r9gQNFMlxN/is5W6GYeOGEz52v+v552v7XI=; b=WfXWQHvIsOOuEgAdd88zr62U2JcWVXzFa1zVS0Gc4gvA2fY2fqAf6XRIJMyAZSIFW4 9U6InTLl8Wq9vbNGa/to9/yJSxMIzFBByOX0N8OejVUsaJtCRFH8A71suRwrBgyC5Usn H26mVNie/qWnAmjz8I25xrU4fcbqv64SRxZ/o/fbdMpIekBm44d6VmzlxD8ZmwVAvFkQ j9YvJRNALQ4RWXLxfTL9eIYpqWWpecTruVcovCuwzssbSP542cra5gr2g0OuHDL877vg 4wWrnpkPEVVpRpNt+mlGtqR2WIPX6rn7YZrBg01uPc53Cvmaw79rbTX64Kz+Z/I+H90J 6Knw== X-Gm-Message-State: AA+aEWZBOcunZwYbTi1S8hM9zt/r+k9BtzT5hmq2WbgWWofmDtRDn0Ts mDLSjF/YXeZW9XshajS6n2+MzjCCNIqQgsV8O+YR5g== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AFSGD/Xuvd5rtAJTQcgBTJUhMCrYLqmpy5axjv1Oyr8VFz3D2jQK59Ifcs2M9Ttz4hU2IVc6AgOFgKTd+X43FQUOt0g= X-Received: by 2002:a37:4f8a:: with SMTP id d132mr18616112qkb.17.1543936866103; Tue, 04 Dec 2018 07:21:06 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 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> In-Reply-To: <949D58FF-9C2F-4516-8547-20A712EC0C92@gmail.com> From: Dave Taht Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2018 07:20:53 -0800 Message-ID: To: Jonathan Morton Cc: Jendaipou Palmei , =?UTF-8?Q?Dave_T=C3=A4ht?= , Cake List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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: Tue, 04 Dec 2018 15:21:06 -0000 On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 7:02 AM Jonathan Morton wrot= e: > > > On 4 Dec, 2018, at 12:31 pm, Jendaipou Palmei wrote: > > > > We have uploaded the plots for the 'count' variable of COBALT (with a s= egment size of 1500 and 1000 bytes). > > > > Link: https://github.com/Daipu/COBALT/wiki/Cobalt-Drop-Count > > > > We have not yet implemented ECN feature in COBALT, so packets are curre= ntly dropped instead of being marked. > > > > Are these the plots that you were referring to? > > More-or-less, yes, though these actually show an internal state variable = of the Codel algorithm rather than the actual number of marks/drops per tim= e interval. I was hoping to see similar graphs for the reference-Codel and= PIE runs, since we can gain more insight from that, and PIE doesn't have a= n internal "count" variable that corresponds with Codel. Nevertheless, the= view into "count" behaviour is interesting in itself, and I'd like to see = the corresponding graphs from reference Codel. > > An artefact visible in these graphs is an apparent lack of sampling while= not in the dropping state. Thus you seem to have a gradual ramp from 0 to= 1 count over the several seconds interval between activations, though in f= act the variable is discrete. It would be better to show that transition m= ore precisely. > > For study, it is also often helpful to zoom in on small time intervals to= see the dynamic behaviour of the algorithm, particularly during the transi= tion from slow-start to steady-state, where there is seemingly a big differ= ence between reference Codel and COBALT. I'm loving the slow start result. > > Another interesting graph to produce for each algorithm and traffic type = is the instantaneous throughput of each flow. This offers insight into the= relative fairness of each algorithm, and might help to explain the anomaly= seen with 1000-byte packets and COBALT. Usually this graph also reveals, = through the shape of each throughput curve, which CC algorithm is in use - = currently I'm guessing NewReno. CUBIC and CTCP, which are also in common u= se, would behave differently. a file showing the timestamp of each drop would be easier to post process. > > - Jonathan Morton > --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht CTO, TekLibre, LLC http://www.teklibre.com Tel: 1-831-205-9740