From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qk0-x235.google.com (mail-qk0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::235]) (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 120B13B29E for ; Sun, 26 Nov 2017 03:42:08 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-qk0-x235.google.com with SMTP id p19so28964317qke.2 for ; Sun, 26 Nov 2017 00:42:07 -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=/W7wAUJYtCgP/XI+5/HxTLNxHiq9dgrxih/ows7ga8M=; b=HkzDKTScbvw1GQRrHn3ZP2ye7Z9gRiix5UvAlizRqMtavXsMIn0p15an8/zoU/ciKT Doay3py9YC9EiTL79EBr9XsG6/NadhbUpHAgbt7GZcH5BWhSajsf3H5jp9njX+6Eneix htj7fBDaCwjfc/syV/LF0dZznfKhiRDyMV/+0rN4ZUx/6U2cuhfkK1FpVgnNNa+v2UlR W6eri4T93j4GH7N0hnZe3pM9RA6BcQAFvyL5DrjaSBfjb8hXWnbsY9oRFA3Xw02n3d/t cOXKmNd/Io6AFeLrydV2ggU1dIGnzuOxtn6gkfw9pa2cuoMTvhi2UC6QpHskUaf0KkQg 7CCQ== 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=/W7wAUJYtCgP/XI+5/HxTLNxHiq9dgrxih/ows7ga8M=; b=P7QNHalmvhmiPjOX6U4pdmK3wIw0eL3UzQOrfBoqHitjRYP8afeB/5Lw2EVUmO6Div /5eHt6A7DVio4yePwDLPOMWMHpEArtUF0Wq2C8oyNpgx8mJ9DnwbRCXkmfLue15pahXh XIaW8FOSHWUvXEkm7hsq/n1HXXoufDuipOaDPA6UvemjL+mKNhHs4U2KuzJaFrL4ZhOG kvQz/OM95VtV7Gw03iJyGB1njkX8Z+P1Wgc+Ln4CbM3Vwua3pOGhi2UTux+MTYIr+cCm /LXBNEbTeanXg3wDsUO+4sKhjkZW0/VulEjejFcLI7ChbbEuwKCBh7OiOIiJU86c8/GK N2VA== X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX6DgRkyAtbA+M47QWpklkZoLEo2cKwBIS0pN3ArnaEoeRP5Lwd1 91l69H8fVd8Iqv7+zhg+mO9PYWIJjWDHLdC//Js= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMZ0+rRNzS31mJTGe3cyAebeTomtZi+9hjy/4UvPdH45aSgN0K91GgPduqxBevXhZ01WXejzPs8h4IyH3bOY8BI= X-Received: by 10.55.97.135 with SMTP id v129mr13412256qkb.305.1511685727447; Sun, 26 Nov 2017 00:42:07 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.193.93 with HTTP; Sun, 26 Nov 2017 00:42:06 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <6BE29FE9-6E32-4324-8B56-6BB3B6E5F033@gmail.com> References: <6BE29FE9-6E32-4324-8B56-6BB3B6E5F033@gmail.com> From: Dave Taht Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2017 00:42:06 -0800 Message-ID: To: Pete Heist Cc: Cake List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Cake] cake flenter results round 0 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: Sun, 26 Nov 2017 08:42:08 -0000 That is a really, really long, and extremely pleasant, way of saying: "OK, it doesn't crash". :) can flenter work with the veth stuff and namespaces? On Sun, Nov 26, 2017 at 12:12 AM, Pete Heist wrote: > I have a script (called flenter) which can run flent with different > parameter variations and produce an html report. I=E2=80=99m very sorry a= gain that > this doesn=E2=80=99t yet use flent=E2=80=99s batch feature- it was starte= d before I knew > about that. > > I=E2=80=99ll use it to produce some =E2=80=9Crounds=E2=80=9D of cake test= s, with notes/analysis of > each round and plans for future rounds. If there=E2=80=99s any feedback o= n anything, > results or what to change, let me know, otherwise I=E2=80=99ll just take = it where > I=E2=80=99m able to. > > I=E2=80=99m calling this round 0, because these tests weren=E2=80=99t des= igned originally > for cake at all, but it=E2=80=99s a vastly stripped down version of tests= I was in > the middle of doing for point-to-point WiFi. The tests need a lot of chan= ges > for the next round to focus more on cake and those are noted at the end. > > Round 0 index of all tests: > > http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake/round0/ > > > *** Notes/Analysis *** > > * When =E2=80=9Cover-limited=E2=80=9D to 200mbit, pfifo bloats everything= , sfq improves the > UDP flows but bloats TCP rtt, and cake clearly holds the lowest rtt for t= he > ping/udp flows as well as TCP rtt, even when compared to fq_codel: > > http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake/round0/eg_csrt_rrulbe_eg_pfifo_200= mbit/index.html > http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake/round0/eg_csrt_rrulbe_eg_sfq_200mb= it/index.html > http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake/round0/eg_csrt_rrulbe_eg_fq_codel_= 200mbit/index.html > http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake/round0/eg_csrt_rrulbe_eg_cake_200m= bit/index.html > > > * At 950 mbit rate limiting, fq_codel holds latency of the ping and udp > flows a bit lower than cake, whereas cake holds tcp rtt a bit lower. sfq > does pretty well actually and pfifo is, well, pfifo: > > http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake/round0/eg_csrt_rrulbe_eg_pfifo_950= mbit/index.html > http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake/round0/eg_csrt_rrulbe_eg_sfq_950mb= it/index.html > http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake/round0/eg_csrt_rrulbe_eg_fq_codel_= 950mbit/index.html > http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake/round0/eg_csrt_rrulbe_eg_cake_950m= bit/index.html > > > * This is a little surprising, at 950mbit rate limiting with nflows 8/8, > 16/16 and 32/32, fq_codel seems to outperform cake both in TCP rtt and > latency of the UDP flows. Is cake=E2=80=99s =E2=80=9Cethernet=E2=80=9D ke= yword is really crucial > here, or is there a difference between Cake and fq_codel at these high > bandwidths? I=E2=80=99ll add it in my later tests. Also I=E2=80=99m losin= g the queue with > 64/64 flows so will lower the bandwidth limit. > > http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake/round0/nflows_32_32_eg_pfifo_950mb= it/index.html > http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake/round0/nflows_32_32_eg_sfq_950mbit= /index.html > http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake/round0/nflows_32_32_eg_fq_codel_95= 0mbit/index.html > http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake/round0/nflows_32_32_eg_cake_950mbi= t/index.html > > > * Obviously cake (with diffserv3 and not besteffort), roundly defeats > everything else in the torrent test because of the de-prioritization of t= he > background flows: > > http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake/round0/tor_rrultor_eg_pfifo_950mbi= t/index.html > http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake/round0/tor_rrultor_eg_sfq_950mbit/= index.html > http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake/round0/tor_rrultor_eg_fq_codel_950= mbit/index.html > http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake/round0/tor_rrultor_eg_cakebe_950mb= it/index.html > http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake/round0/tor_rrultor_eg_cake_950mbit= /index.html > > > * The benefit to lowering cake=E2=80=99s rtt parameter in an Ethernet env= ironment > can be seen on the TCP rtt: > > http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake/round0/cake_rtt_100ms_rrulbe_eg_ca= ke_950mbit/index.html > http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake/round0/cake_rtt_60ms_rrulbe_eg_cak= e_950mbit/index.html > http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake/round0/cake_rtt_20ms_rrulbe_eg_cak= e_950mbit/index.html > http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake/round0/cake_rtt_10ms_rrulbe_eg_cak= e_950mbit/index.html > > > * I=E2=80=99m a little surprised that fq_codel holds UDP flow latency a l= ittle lower > at "target 1ms interval 10ms" than cake=E2=80=99s "rtt 10ms=E2=80=9D. It = almost seems like a > trend that Cake outperforms at lower bandwidths and fq_codel at higher > bandwidths. > > http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake/round0/fq_codel_ti_t5ms_i100ms_rru= lbe_eg_fq_codel_950mbit/index.html > http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake/round0/fq_codel_ti_t3ms_i60ms_rrul= be_eg_fq_codel_950mbit/index.html > http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake/round0/fq_codel_ti_t2ms_i20ms_rrul= be_eg_fq_codel_950mbit/index.html > http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake/round0/fq_codel_ti_t1ms_i10ms_rrul= be_eg_fq_codel_950mbit/index.html > > > * ECN helps marginally with UDP flow rtt, but I=E2=80=99ve never seen ECN= do very > much. When does it help the most? > > http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake/round0/ecn_off_rrulbe_eg_cake_950m= bit/index.html > http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake/round0/ecn_on_rrulbe_eg_cake_950mb= it/index.html > > > * Cake=E2=80=99s =E2=80=9Cethernet=E2=80=9D parameter helps a bit, I=E2= =80=99ll add it to all other rate > limited tests in my next round: > > http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake/round0/cake_overhead_rrulbe_eg_cak= e_950mbit/index.html > http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake/round0/apu2-eth/cake_overhead_rrul= be_eg_cakeeth_950mbit/index.html > > > * Cake=E2=80=99s host isolation clearly works, but I=E2=80=99m a little s= urprised that > =E2=80=9Csrchost/dsthost=E2=80=9D is more fair on a host level than > =E2=80=9Cdual-srchost/dual-dsthost=E2=80=9D (I usually find it easiest to= just scroll to the > bottom of the page and look at the numbers): > > http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake/round0/hostiso_eg_fq_codel_950mbit= /index.html > http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake/round0/hostiso_eg_cake_src_cake_ds= t_950mbit/index.html > http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake/round0/hostiso_eg_cake_dsrc_cake_d= dst_950mbit/index.html > > > * Anyone see anything in my =E2=80=9CFlow Isolation Mix=E2=80=9D tests? T= hose are a little > hard to read. :) They used to be combined with a VoIP test but I don=E2= =80=99t have > a d-itg setup now. > > > *** Round 1 Plans *** > > - Update cake to latest (will do this with every round) > - Remove all =E2=80=9Cfull-duplex limiting=E2=80=9D (egress and ingress) = tests as I don=E2=80=99t > see the use here > - Add cake=E2=80=99s =E2=80=9Cethernet=E2=80=9D keyword to all rate limit= ed tests > - Lower standard rate limit to 900mbit ensure no queue loss (particularly > for nflows tests) > - Take standard rrulbe tests to even lower bandwidths: 1mbit, 10mbit, > 50mbit, 100mbit > - Add bql tests (no rate limiting) > - Add 100us, 1ms, 2ms, 3ms, 5ms, 8ms to Cake RTT tests > - Add nflows tests at lower bandwidths > - Fix UDP flood tests (no suitable iperf binary found) > - Remove or improve flow isolation tests > - Add ethtool output to host info > > > *** Plans for Future Rounds *** > > - Add flow isolation tests with rtt variation (to look again at problem I > reported in an earlier thread) > - Use netem to make a spread of rtts and bandwidths (maybe the most usefu= l > of all?) > - Add ack filtering tests > - Add VoIP tests (I hope to do this with irtt) > - Test BBR > - Use qemu to test other archs (I may never get to this, honestly) > > > _______________________________________________ > Cake mailing list > Cake@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake > --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht CEO, TekLibre, LLC http://www.teklibre.com Tel: 1-669-226-2619