From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qt0-x232.google.com (mail-qt0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::232]) (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 464153B29E for ; Fri, 1 Dec 2017 14:45:46 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-qt0-x232.google.com with SMTP id d4so14446798qtj.5 for ; Fri, 01 Dec 2017 11:45:46 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=1gPP1wZ9m1Fhct/rl4on7cha6DazUkaa76qICC8vQEs=; b=TlttYJ6XV7rz52BWUOI+QwwTBWvZE/4gBEnRNLJlvF7ky32YlTO2+k1DhetwvqBEGz oxmMDH7+VORSqx5x2b5C1sR2/ngtzoWhrxJ2C+mX4qR6NOPbP4hxmjDNV2xzg5gFnAfX 12Q8IaDkb8aTtT3A7UtOUmtPpZ2PI2oM30OnehoeY/rZJG8x+01OlwZaluZrP/iqDKLu sPN7HsyLVehu20x4z6vIEeP1q+BR5Umm5v/e3VGwY4zJdx9IRlbTnjAgyUyj700igx/R XOrnoV51PSviouPBKbkYcnwoCXA6rdYrj1p2jO02TWna8Zc5YoTGSXzMnPGgApEhNWUw decA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=1gPP1wZ9m1Fhct/rl4on7cha6DazUkaa76qICC8vQEs=; b=AKxzY7PnnMY70Cov+SiALR0xueC42ew/4pTlz3bv/oSrF9WbzJOjrgTvy7YJ7fM3UL SubKeEVBV1IecV9CKOda1JBPFZitD7+7uZhTOLOufaW/1le6UPXIGi5dvgC9NKss4c3D AbKwuqBEnE1r74j89f7P3A4RTxEcMy/evMNp63saVDQC7s8uPzzqsGH5TdsJifvfQ+s1 S/jHn2/J+68yd17ZIF9JQRglsSQxAwwF4RoKwAh26LwMYGRI196ItriMZPdwoe71hKpS CsqOUrvLPhKiBWjNSh5gVZdgQwfz2ZeuF+JLinSZo5mPPBRqQ6oN5KkSLxqMDrM5uXXe UHgQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AKGB3mKaUBm/aZKKuDxFoKqW+MGXTDZm65hWnO8xOrPh+O1Vbqy+YVZz J0IHL7wz2d9Ho2gLAd2GsFgwO0bJP5djcmBoges= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMYLKLq8Grn5IA0msdG9aNw/ceMTk87qjhP3M/oUQYviXpQZjYmPhr5vk8Vkz2ttb28+boloma3KBwmA7yT7eJE= X-Received: by 10.200.36.203 with SMTP id t11mr10374151qtt.277.1512157545744; Fri, 01 Dec 2017 11:45:45 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.193.93 with HTTP; Fri, 1 Dec 2017 11:45:45 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <98B33089-BA99-40C2-8C25-B4568505AAC6@gmail.com> From: Dave Taht Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2017 11:45:45 -0800 Message-ID: To: Georgios Amanakis Cc: Cake List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Cake] cake flenter results round 3 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: Fri, 01 Dec 2017 19:45:46 -0000 On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Georgios Amanakis wr= ote: > cake vs sfq and fq_codel looks great! You already have fq_codel in the > graphs, do you mean codel? > > In terms of simulating CMTS I am trying to simulate a cable connection. > Is the following reasonable? > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D8<=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > servers --- delay --- isp --- mbox --- clients > > delay: > tc qdisc replace dev delay.r root netem delay ZZms rate XXXmbit limit 100= 000 > tc qdisc replace dev delay.l root netem delay ZZms rate XXXmbit limit 100= 000 There is not much need to specify the rate here, just the delay. You could like say 10Gbit, if you wanted. > isp: > tc qdisc replace dev isp.l root bfifo limit 1024k > tc qdisc replace dev isp.r root bfifo limit 1024k No, because this is not the bottleneck queue. isp.r tc qdisc del dev isp.r root # a little uncertain of what happens with h= andle tc qdisc replace dev isp.r root handle 1: netem rate YYYmbit \ limit 100000 tc qdisc add dev isp.r parent 1:1 handle 10:1 bfifo limit 1024k I think. > mbox: > tc qdisc replace dev mbox.l root cake bandwidth YYYmbit > tc qdisc replace dev mbox.r root cake bandwidth YYYmbit tc qdisc del dev mbox.r root # to leave it unshaped # or put cake back in to shape it after the isp shaper above. > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D8<=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > > George > > On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 2:23 PM, Dave Taht wrote: >> >> That's really hard to argue with. An fq_codel same conditions (and >> pfifo and pie) might be interesting here. >> >> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 9:13 AM, Georgios Amanakis >> wrote: >> > I gave high RTT with high bandwidth a try: >> > server -- delay -- mbox -- client >> > netserver 300/300ms 45/900mbit flent >> > >> > I had to run flent with "-s 0.61" in order to avoid errors with fping >> > dying >> > prematurely. >> > Comparing noack, ack, and ack-aggressive, ack seems to give the highes= t >> > download rates. >> > Cake was setup with "rtt 600ms". >> > >> > George >> > >> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 6:25 PM, Jonathan Morton >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> High RTT with relatively high bandwidth is traditionally considered >> >> challenging, and is representative of Australasian and satellite >> >> connections. Definitely do some of those. >> >> >> >> Low bandwidth should also be interesting. DSL at 4/1 Mbit is typical >> >> entry level package here. >> >> >> >> - Jonathan Morton >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Cake mailing list >> >> Cake@lists.bufferbloat.net >> >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake >> >> >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Cake mailing list >> > Cake@lists.bufferbloat.net >> > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Dave T=C3=A4ht >> CEO, TekLibre, LLC >> http://www.teklibre.com >> Tel: 1-669-226-2619 > > --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht CEO, TekLibre, LLC http://www.teklibre.com Tel: 1-669-226-2619