From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-x22b.google.com (mail-wm0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::22b]) (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 7390D3B29E for ; Fri, 21 Apr 2017 04:34:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-wm0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id o81so10274054wmb.1 for ; Fri, 21 Apr 2017 01:34:41 -0700 (PDT) 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; bh=7jMX3cTwMyBOFQNU7aylQ9V9AknoOVI53hpsM8XkRwk=; b=EbN3CXDTMJsASy2uBwsyFUSHlfGysldZJ554jdihWc/EahU/wLP37ZaZpso+E4ruIy 18suv5AMOOZQAfaXtA9ZptrrPVTMwhyTDIzPVkv9SX4iii4WnOZPXr5UtqWYzdewzRF3 I51sR2Kx3w6FqTq7m2d6rIcFMU7oBm6SbwJknKQzoNkfws2dd+VuW3mjndtQxAC8Cmle kL/QVFiPhz9rjrpCCT7aOgG4tz7v4/QRwCAgelZdpK1P9DSESCB52Jz56PHnPtEo7otX 0+rGQdYp2tKSyyS2QSmaOGGLvaRIvnA55H8iWa/3sQ9Cu8uJacRiGBjJPjTdAnxoBstJ N1RA== 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; bh=7jMX3cTwMyBOFQNU7aylQ9V9AknoOVI53hpsM8XkRwk=; b=M/dzYZldvZrhkFx5IlPAa1fMeXKU0RrIJB2E/VIPsg1zr6gAWOVflJ9ITTyUG0mUBW zdADYvirS/C7vAdSJAmAmatqntOFUZIrwZA4PD/rrHcbxY1K0bZ3vOYk3TFBgIAuY54z Go7/H//MJlKqWyfcJOVsa+hSehGLpgj4gAiAjy16Y5cfFz5JhKNj8D3yqWA2CXIx7aSN l1UQbsuQVYUXZVnuf4+bXZ3qlcG5SZh0q7zr9l/L+u0l3UcY/VXO7iMluOomgPDVFSKa isoQ0JtQ7osqOaskjehViO1CQ5iUziISBvgedGZI6QS6LnZiIDFqBPuODIZGV34rC4ka BgmQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AN3rC/6iPoDsOxyBI0bzdH7vp/q7q6jSSlwp3mHKWVt9W8mzPljgHnu9 OSxkfUh1k2YZ3hUtLE2GnAa2ciuSwg== X-Received: by 10.28.55.3 with SMTP id e3mr7339931wma.15.1492763680352; Fri, 21 Apr 2017 01:34:40 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.80.169.59 with HTTP; Fri, 21 Apr 2017 01:34:39 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <22E633CF-5EE0-4B0F-89A8-B790E730FB6C@gmx.de> References: <05C0B0C7-4337-4115-AC6B-DA81392FCB34@gmail.com> <22E633CF-5EE0-4B0F-89A8-B790E730FB6C@gmx.de> From: Dendari Marini Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2017 10:34:39 +0200 Message-ID: To: Sebastian Moeller Cc: Jonathan Morton , cake@lists.bufferbloat.net Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1143d6b2e6bbf1054da9201a Subject: Re: [Cake] Getting Cake to work better with Steam and similar applications 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, 21 Apr 2017 08:34:41 -0000 --001a1143d6b2e6bbf1054da9201a Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello, thanks for all of your replies. First of all, my connection encapsulation should be ATM LLC and it can actually reach up to 17.5/1 Mbps, but that's kinda best case scenario which is why I wanted to play it safe with just 16/.9 (which I should reach more consistently). Back to the Steam issue. Unfortunately I can't seem to get really consistent results, mainly because sometimes it's downloading the game from just a few connections and other times it's downloading from dozens and dozens connections. The latter is the one giving me more issues both in terms of latency/packet loss and in terms of evenly splitting the bandwidth across the hosts. One thing that seems to give better results is changing the interface where Cake is used from eth0 to pppoe0. When I used fq_codel it seemed to give better results when using eth0 and so I went ahead and did the same with Cake. Anyway more testing needed, will report if I notice any consistent result. By the way this is the thread I opened on the Ubiquiti forums talking about this issue (not sure if it can give you some more info): https://community.ubnt.com/t5/EdgeMAX/Smart-Queue-seemingly-not-working-for= -Steam-downloads/td-p/1890405 Also the thread where I got Cake for the ER-X from: https://community.ubnt.com/t5/EdgeMAX/Cake-and-FQ-PIE-compiled-for-the-Edge= Router-devices/td-p/1679844 On 20 April 2017 at 20:36, Sebastian Moeller wrote: > > > On Apr 20, 2017, at 18:05, Dendari Marini wrote: > > > > Hello, thanks for your reply. > > > > Looks like most of your options are okay, including the correct =E2=80= =9Cdual=E2=80=9D > modes and =E2=80=9Cingress=E2=80=9D mode in the right place. However, I = think you need to > adjust your bandwidth and overhead settings, otherwise Cake isn=E2=80=99t= reliably > in control of the bottleneck queues. Try these to begin with: > > > > =E2=80=A6 bandwidth 850Kbit conservative dual-srchost nat > > > > =E2=80=A6 bandwidth 15Mbit conservative dual-dsthost nat ingress > > > > That should give you correct operation, and you can fine-tune from ther= e. > > > > Just did quick test with your settings. First thing I noticed is my > final download bandwidth is about 12Mbps, Steam on PC1 downloads at > 1.4-1.5MB/s while downloading a file on PC2 seems to max out at ~250KB/s. > From my understanding I should see each PC download at ~700KB/s, or am I > mistaken? > > Assuming you measured good put in [M|K]iBytes this adds up to 1.5+0.25 = =3D > 1.75 * 1024^2 * 8 =3D 14680064 Bits or (1.4+0.25) * 8 *1024^2 / 1000^2 = =3D > 13.84 Mbps which seems a bit high for a 16Mbps ADSL link. I would ecpext > something like 16 * (48/53) * ((1500 - 8 - 20 -20) / (1500 + 32)) =3D 13= .73 > Mbps TCP/IPv4 goodput=E2=80=A6 so you seem to be running close to theoret= ical > maximum of your link (assuming I am not totally off with the overhead > (estimated ADSL overhead on top of MTU: 6 destination MAC + 6 source MAC = + > 2 ethertype + 3 ATM LLC + 5 ATM SNAP + 2 ATM pad + 8 ATM AAL5 SAR 32 > bytes). But with your shaper set at 15Mbps without the atm option you wil= l > actually accept up to 15 * (53/48) =3D 16.5625 Mbps on the wire, which > probably is above your link bandwidth. This fits well with the really low > number of drops in your cake stats, you simply never have cake feel that > shaping is needed? > > Best Regards > > > > > > > > On 20 April 2017 at 17:32, Jonathan Morton > wrote: > > > >> On 20 Apr, 2017, at 18:23, Dendari Marini wrote: > >> > >>> Could you post the output of calling =E2=80=9Ctc -s qdisc=E2=80=9D he= re on the list > please? That should allow to figure out what you actually told cake to do= ;0 > > > >> qdisc cake 8001: dev eth0 root refcnt 2 bandwidth 900Kbit diffserv3 > dual-srchost nat rtt 100.0ms raw > > > >> qdisc cake 8002: dev ifb4eth0 root refcnt 2 bandwidth 16Mbit diffserv3 > dual-dsthost nat ingress rtt 100.0ms raw > > > > Looks like most of your options are okay, including the correct =E2=80= =9Cdual=E2=80=9D > modes and =E2=80=9Cingress=E2=80=9D mode in the right place. However, I = think you need to > adjust your bandwidth and overhead settings, otherwise Cake isn=E2=80=99t= reliably > in control of the bottleneck queues. Try these to begin with: > > > > =E2=80=A6 bandwidth 850Kbit conservative dual-srchost nat > > > > =E2=80=A6 bandwidth 15Mbit conservative dual-dsthost nat ingress > > > > That should give you correct operation, and you can fine-tune from ther= e. > > > > - Jonathan Morton > > > > > > > > --001a1143d6b2e6bbf1054da9201a Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello, thanks for all of your replies.

= First of all, my connection=C2=A0encapsula= tion should be ATM LLC and it=C2=A0can actually reach up to 17.5/1 M= bps, but that's kinda best case scenario which is why I wanted to play = it safe with just 16/.9 (which I should reach more consistently).

Back to the Steam i= ssue. Unfortunately I can't seem to get really consistent results, main= ly because sometimes it's downloading the game from just a few connecti= ons and other times it's downloading from dozens and dozens connections= . The latter is the one giving me more issues both in terms of latency/pack= et loss and in terms of evenly splitting the bandwidth across the hosts.

One thing that seems to give better results is c= hanging the interface where Cake is used from eth0 to pppoe0. When I used f= q_codel it seemed to give better results when using eth0 and so I went ahea= d and did the same with Cake.

Anyway more testing = needed, will report if I notice any consistent result.

=
By the way this is the thread I opened on the Ubiquiti forums talking = about this issue (not sure if it can give you some more info): https://community.ubnt.com/t5/EdgeMAX/Smart-Q= ueue-seemingly-not-working-for-Steam-downloads/td-p/1890405

On 20 April 2017 at 20:36, = Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:

> On Apr 20, 2017, at 18:05, Dendari Marini <dendari92@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello, thanks for your reply.
>
> Looks like most of your options are okay, including the correct =E2=80= =9Cdual=E2=80=9D modes and =E2=80=9Cingress=E2=80=9D mode in the right plac= e.=C2=A0 However, I think you need to adjust your bandwidth and overhead se= ttings, otherwise Cake isn=E2=80=99t reliably in control of the bottleneck = queues.=C2=A0 Try these to begin with:
>
> =E2=80=A6 bandwidth 850Kbit conservative dual-srchost nat
>
> =E2=80=A6 bandwidth 15Mbit conservative dual-dsthost nat ingress
>
> That should give you correct operation, and you can fine-tune from the= re.
>
> Just did quick test with your settings. First thing I noticed is my fi= nal download bandwidth is about 12Mbps, Steam on PC1 downloads at 1.4-1.5MB= /s while downloading a file on PC2 seems to max out at ~250KB/s. From my un= derstanding I should see each PC download at ~700KB/s, or am I mistaken?
Assuming you measured good put in [M|K]iBy= tes this adds up to=C2=A0 1.5+0.25 =3D 1.75 * 1024^2 * 8 =3D 14680064 Bits = or (1.4+0.25) * 8 *1024^2 / 1000^2 =3D 13.84 Mbps which seems a bit high fo= r a 16Mbps ADSL link. I would ecpext something like 16 * (48/53)=C2=A0 * ((= 1500 - 8 - 20 -20) / (1500 + 32)) =3D 13.73 Mbps TCP/IPv4 goodput=E2=80=A6 = so you seem to be running close to theoretical maximum of your link (assumi= ng I am not totally off with the overhead (estimated ADSL overhead on top o= f MTU: 6 destination MAC + 6 source MAC + 2 ethertype + 3 ATM LLC + 5 ATM S= NAP + 2 ATM pad + 8 ATM AAL5 SAR 32 bytes). But with your shaper set at 15M= bps without the atm option you will actually accept up to 15 * (53/48) =3D = 16.5625 Mbps on the wire, which probably is above your link bandwidth. This= fits well with the really low number of drops in your cake stats, you simp= ly never have cake feel that shaping is needed?

Best Regards




>
> On 20 April 2017 at 17:= 32, Jonathan Morton <chromatix9= 9@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 20 Apr, 2017, at 18:23, Dendari Marini <dendari92@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Could you post the output of calling =E2=80=9Ctc -s qdisc=E2= =80=9D here on the list please? That should allow to figure out what you ac= tually told cake to do ;0
>
>> qdisc cake 8001: dev eth0 root refcnt 2 bandwidth 900Kbit diffserv= 3 dual-srchost nat rtt 100.0ms raw
>
>> qdisc cake 8002: dev ifb4eth0 root refcnt 2 bandwidth 16Mbit diffs= erv3 dual-dsthost nat ingress rtt 100.0ms raw
>
> Looks like most of your options are okay, including the correct =E2=80= =9Cdual=E2=80=9D modes and =E2=80=9Cingress=E2=80=9D mode in the right plac= e.=C2=A0 However, I think you need to adjust your bandwidth and overhead se= ttings, otherwise Cake isn=E2=80=99t reliably in control of the bottleneck = queues.=C2=A0 Try these to begin with:
>
> =E2=80=A6 bandwidth 850Kbit conservative dual-srchost nat
>
> =E2=80=A6 bandwidth 15Mbit conservative dual-dsthost nat ingress
>
> That should give you correct operation, and you can fine-tune from the= re.
>
> - Jonathan Morton
>
>
>


--001a1143d6b2e6bbf1054da9201a--