From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pf0-x22f.google.com (mail-pf0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::22f]) (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 76FEE3B25E for ; Sat, 23 Jul 2016 14:59:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-pf0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id h186so51120246pfg.3 for ; Sat, 23 Jul 2016 11:59:44 -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 :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=lT97Se088QOxzqiTSAmjTYLkI9A9Ij8T5YWlTu+57sw=; b=iLWYWeU9D0yfwvrcli71uZaHoLoNgUYkPa8QUSMhEJRhNO6HBfY6O8HjdlLx3g5QEq Sd8xRD9zUsjE0/1kzfdXAyv229Xt70UyP0xRtZs7tyXVNTSfe8qdXHXAcTcqvAbsN8Q8 M1GDDh6Fs5Y97A2yUIvbX8IdjUeZfLjUAss023ZjbVzXL3kKN6wWLNMPUNP66NUjrgVE 6hUdPfafc5kzgYgL7Ips5rtXIahun04tpGB0n3rl69j3MLEAcP4Zt8M4F1RYICa8YkZC X6/sLu+91lbJn0gcfHqAjfORF+tdOt6C7tewGmm/qs5zkxlR6z+GIYnjwT7gJmMJYnIW pFVA== 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:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=lT97Se088QOxzqiTSAmjTYLkI9A9Ij8T5YWlTu+57sw=; b=N54dwvjRbonxyV3CsOgAw38YwIzjj0ln6hAb54NvntX3l+TOgmkSZnB8ccTZxRhopX Xzkz1NeAHyAbupvGTRE3uKvqvZMpmhUE0SkIOaGF5APlYqfKccTQtrC/Kq64NUHIhC0N 1LV8yJTAIJbRzO68SBKdcfqRafLzwGMy7GwuhRqLUo3NCGYVhCgXOHGGH6zpFRm1Ps+H 0+OaTLATP6N9yS6qa95gYHo/tmdVBsUJaXueqxQ3+swhWq+jiUjCIp0kBwKF+LPmZFJ+ RGRS2znB0JagoB6IRGqDhJ60MJ/hIIdmkVUOTjTbOll6e0KdOc8JRtxuGMFiuW+vWdxd SgFg== X-Gm-Message-State: AEkooutYe2jgMNelT6P8q7Lm3fCJoN19IWdck7mBoe8fqhPod+1MsVodn3pVt0fQzfekZrZChyazNDC02oY9hw== X-Received: by 10.98.82.74 with SMTP id g71mr16778129pfb.157.1469300383567; Sat, 23 Jul 2016 11:59:43 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.66.142.133 with HTTP; Sat, 23 Jul 2016 11:59:43 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <66C89432-6E70-422F-A638-7522BF233707@gmail.com> <35967373-D9F6-4C0C-8005-787DB8C7B1BB@gmx.de> <7ECE7E7A-0310-4DC4-8AC9-29B0F1F2E383@gmx.de> From: Loganaden Velvindron Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2016 22:59:43 +0400 Message-ID: To: moeller0 Cc: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Cake] fq_codel on 3g network in Mauritius 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: Sat, 23 Jul 2016 18:59:44 -0000 After going through: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-aqm-fq-codel-06 I think that I should remove the itarget and etarget, and set the Interval rather to 500ms. The _interval_ parameter has the same semantics as CoDel and is used to ensure that the minimum sojourn time of packets in a queue used as an estimator by the CoDel control algorithm is a relatively up-to- date value. That is, CoDel only reacts to delay experienced in the last epoch of length interval. It SHOULD be set to be on the order of the worst-case RTT through the bottleneck to give end-points sufficient time to react. The default interval value is 100 ms. The default interval value is not suited for my 3g connection where the worse-case RTT is much higher. On Sat, Jul 23, 2016 at 10:36 PM, Loganaden Velvindron wrote: >> It seems the initial burst like behavior from the earlier test w= as a false positive; these test are still not beautiful, but at least they = do not indicate that HTB+fq_codel as configured on your system do not suffe= r from uncontrolled bursty-ness. Unfortunately, I have no real insight or a= dvice to offer how to improve your situation (short f setting the shaper ra= tes considerably lower). >> BTW, =E2=80=9Ctc -d qdisc=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9Ctc -s disc=E2=80= =9D give a bit more information, and =E2=80=9Ctc class show dev eth1=E2=80= =9D and =E2=80=9Ctc class show dev ifb4eth1=E2=80=9D will also offer more d= etail about your setup. >> >> >> Best Regards >> Sebastian >> >> >> > > tc -d qdisc: > > qdisc fq_codel 0: dev eth0 root refcnt 2 limit 1024p flows 1024 > quantum 300 target 5.0ms interval 100.0ms ecn > qdisc htb 1: dev eth1 root refcnt 2 r2q 10 default 12 > direct_packets_stat 5 ver 3.17 direct_qlen 1000 > qdisc fq_codel 110: dev eth1 parent 1:11 limit 1001p flows 1024 > quantum 300 target 500.0ms interval 100.0ms > qdisc fq_codel 120: dev eth1 parent 1:12 limit 1001p flows 1024 > quantum 300 target 500.0ms interval 100.0ms > qdisc fq_codel 130: dev eth1 parent 1:13 limit 1001p flows 1024 > quantum 300 target 500.0ms interval 100.0ms > qdisc ingress ffff: dev eth1 parent ffff:fff1 ---------------- > qdisc mq 0: dev wlan0 root > qdisc htb 1: dev ifb4eth1 root refcnt 2 r2q 10 default 10 > direct_packets_stat 0 ver 3.17 direct_qlen 32 > qdisc fq_codel 110: dev ifb4eth1 parent 1:10 limit 1001p flows 1024 > quantum 300 target 500.0ms interval 100.0ms ecn > > tc -s qdisc: > > qdisc fq_codel 0: dev eth0 root refcnt 2 limit 1024p flows 1024 > quantum 300 target 5.0ms interval 100.0ms ecn > Sent 0 bytes 0 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 0) > backlog 0b 0p requeues 0 > maxpacket 256 drop_overlimit 0 new_flow_count 0 ecn_mark 0 > new_flows_len 0 old_flows_len 0 > qdisc htb 1: dev eth1 root refcnt 2 r2q 10 default 12 > direct_packets_stat 5 direct_qlen 1000 > Sent 23456195 bytes 109776 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 86210 requeues 0) > backlog 0b 4p requeues 0 > qdisc fq_codel 110: dev eth1 parent 1:11 limit 1001p flows 1024 > quantum 300 target 500.0ms interval 100.0ms > Sent 14760 bytes 164 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 0) > backlog 0b 0p requeues 0 > maxpacket 256 drop_overlimit 0 new_flow_count 163 ecn_mark 0 > new_flows_len 1 old_flows_len 0 > qdisc fq_codel 120: dev eth1 parent 1:12 limit 1001p flows 1024 > quantum 300 target 500.0ms interval 100.0ms > Sent 23440300 bytes 109600 pkt (dropped 115, overlimits 0 requeues 0) > backlog 5816b 4p requeues 0 > maxpacket 1454 drop_overlimit 0 new_flow_count 15749 ecn_mark 0 > new_flows_len 0 old_flows_len 1 > qdisc fq_codel 130: dev eth1 parent 1:13 limit 1001p flows 1024 > quantum 300 target 500.0ms interval 100.0ms > Sent 0 bytes 0 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 0) > backlog 0b 0p requeues 0 > maxpacket 256 drop_overlimit 0 new_flow_count 0 ecn_mark 0 > new_flows_len 0 old_flows_len 0 > qdisc ingress ffff: dev eth1 parent ffff:fff1 ---------------- > Sent 190858989 bytes 149884 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 0) > backlog 0b 0p requeues 0 > qdisc mq 0: dev wlan0 root > Sent 194287835 bytes 153002 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 7) > backlog 0b 0p requeues 7 > qdisc htb 1: dev ifb4eth1 root refcnt 2 r2q 10 default 10 > direct_packets_stat 0 direct_qlen 32 > Sent 192953486 bytes 149877 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 41505 requeues 0) > backlog 0b 0p requeues 0 > qdisc fq_codel 110: dev ifb4eth1 parent 1:10 limit 1001p flows 1024 > quantum 300 target 500.0ms interval 100.0ms ecn > Sent 192953486 bytes 149877 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 0) > backlog 0b 0p requeues 0 > maxpacket 1454 drop_overlimit 0 new_flow_count 16778 ecn_mark 0 > new_flows_len 1 old_flows_len 2 > > > tc class show dev eth1 > class htb 1:11 parent 1:1 leaf 110: prio 1 rate 128Kbit ceil 100Kbit > burst 1600b cburst 1600b > class htb 1:1 root rate 300Kbit ceil 300Kbit burst 1599b cburst 1599b > class htb 1:10 parent 1:1 prio 0 rate 300Kbit ceil 300Kbit burst 1599b > cburst 1599b > class htb 1:13 parent 1:1 leaf 130: prio 3 rate 50Kbit ceil 284Kbit > burst 1600b cburst 1599b > class htb 1:12 parent 1:1 leaf 120: prio 2 rate 50Kbit ceil 284Kbit > burst 1600b cburst 1599b > class fq_codel 110:188 parent 110: > class fq_codel 120:3d6 parent 120: > > > tc class show dev ifb4eth1: > class htb 1:10 parent 1:1 leaf 110: prio 0 rate 19600Kbit ceil > 19600Kbit burst 1597b cburst 1597b > class htb 1:1 root rate 19600Kbit ceil 19600Kbit burst 1597b cburst 1597b > class fq_codel 110:2f1 parent 110: > class fq_codel 110:330 parent 110: > > I changed the target from 350ms to 500ms for both ingress and egree, > and the throughput seem to be better: > > http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/4515961