From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-x22a.google.com (mail-wm0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::22a]) (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 4121A3B25D for ; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 10:53:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-wm0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id i5so76188341wmg.0 for ; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 07:53:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=+x/6bniOnAIUoz8wfV0BZgtSGCe5RWUraPgpGERyCFA=; b=zmY64dESmgnPxKUFlyC69bm27u6qQlIZoqlkurgK7g2/e/VHGR2qmrg2StMpRnw/Wb qIENZ7zHQdboEWXFZ0DJEZhR6pxGAeSvZFrQvTx+6KsC6Gw+fQTtQA/kKdqBKJY2RDKD nWnSF/N0rpMiSN7rkaVYtCtuKTSVJHn/iTANUZJEWTO4mB7b9Yohs6FemBzQDUTXgO0p iWK9vZ3kxq4gXh7M9KcomlDIjsm0v9/ALjc5jNpJcH5Y7akyX62tdZrO3vSAS9LQaHIn Gc2RHtLH7I75yziSgoTU6EIK71EJbl67O59YpsAu3yPd25iWLlkSZ9zo97iJ6CArldIT 2ALg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=+x/6bniOnAIUoz8wfV0BZgtSGCe5RWUraPgpGERyCFA=; b=f+yBHPxdXmMSZZyH6fazxO47LGaAz5V3mZp4l+I0ICntjstjAbqj36xudmZhmRKP1E KgXUH09q90svWRlMiZisDyZb2C1G5Gn+kJZrbVGidWp7o8KJRppLQjWQ9uut3eiYb8Y0 LaQb+FvmQgnXPPUubtzpm2RJTJUtghHN7kwNmAUZrzu3zTPMSg3Wm1Q0PNdm2R/eVwk9 FcJP89NQUOfMn9IC0JUK0nShmT7DvKeubAAENYtJAIetnJXqeNYj6sxIpAnz4tL5WQio XwYTVmlWjitizts1r+R7BiFiUuCn8tT5IkG/D0hqBTO6cwgpY6ylu3o7WEQw01LWRAeE j3sg== X-Gm-Message-State: AEkoousO2MudOXjNUHU3VWyDefE1vXtBO0AFypP1Jc34lHNH9VRrU0U3fWprze81wRs1h4FSdEUUdhj6AQVVsQ== X-Received: by 10.194.106.1 with SMTP id gq1mr7368184wjb.167.1472136825169; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 07:53:45 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.194.68.105 with HTTP; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 07:53:44 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <3ed1004a-d688-11ec-c788-d8a456b22b34@gmail.com> References: <96AE5B3F-FDD6-455E-BB08-D4A162EC3F23@gmx.de> <3ed1004a-d688-11ec-c788-d8a456b22b34@gmail.com> From: "techicist@gmail.com" Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 15:53:44 +0100 Message-ID: To: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8fb1ec34866aeb053ae690a5 Subject: Re: [Cake] Configuring cake for VDSL2 bridged connection 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: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 14:53:46 -0000 --e89a8fb1ec34866aeb053ae690a5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sorry, what is flowblind? Yes, I am using cake :) So is that latency increase when uploading and downloading? And so I should be aiming to achieve that as I slowly increase the bandwidth? On 24 August 2016 at 20:49, Alan Jenkins wrote: > On 24/08/16 20:47, Alan Jenkins wrote: > > So you can read off (+calculate) overall throughput, in both directions. > > And it looks like your latency under load rises by only about 2ms. That'= s > the sort of thing we're aiming for. > > Pure codel aims for 5ms, so I take it you're using fq_codel. > > /reads subject line > > or using standard cake, and not passing `flowblind` to disable the fair > queuing > > And... yes > > (1500 * 8) / 4_000_000 =3D 0.003 > > It takes 3ms to transmit a full packet in the slower direction. So when > it's busy, ping can be delayed on average by 1.5ms (while the current > packet is transmitted). Something like that anyway. > > > On 24/08/16 20:33, techicist@gmail.com wrote: > > Thanks for the reply. I understand now =F0=9F=98=80 > > What can be taken from these graphs? I'm afraid I really am lost now. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Cake mailing list > Cake@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake > > > > > --e89a8fb1ec34866aeb053ae690a5 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sorry, what is flowblind? Yes, I am using cake :)

=
So is that latency increase when uploading and downloading? And = so I should be aiming to achieve that as I slowly increase the bandwidth?

On 24 A= ugust 2016 at 20:49, Alan Jenkins <alan.christopher.jenki= ns@gmail.com> wrote:
=20 =20 =20
On 24/08/16 20:47, Alan Jenkins wrote:
So you can read off (+calculate) overall thro= ughput, in both directions.

And it looks like your latency under load rises by only about 2ms.=C2=A0 That's the sort of thing we're aiming for.

Pure codel aims for 5ms, so I take it you're using fq_codel. /reads subject line

or using standard cake, and not passing `flowblind` to disable the fair queuing

And... yes

(1500 * 8) / 4_000_000 =3D 0.003

It takes 3ms to transmit a full packet in the slower direction. So when it's busy, ping can be delayed on average by 1.5ms (while th= e current packet is transmitted).=C2=A0 Something like that anyway.


On 24/08/16 20:33, techicist@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks for the reply. I understand now =F0= =9F=98=80

What can be taken from these graphs? I'm afraid I really am los= t now.



_______________________________________________
Cake mailing list
Cak= e@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake




--e89a8fb1ec34866aeb053ae690a5--