From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qg0-f43.google.com (mail-qg0-f43.google.com [209.85.192.43]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B65E021F1F3 for ; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 04:58:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qg0-f43.google.com with SMTP id a108so345762qge.30 for ; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 04:58:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:references:in-reply-to:subject:date :message-id:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :thread-index:content-language; bh=QlxNldqE1pkxWB2f6A4lhbgZonC1B22R/iPpxFZk6XI=; b=jP3uXSD+aZgP4His1s2e/CuG7cqhx8Rko8WB0UPOXPKo/4iRYirjg5PriXGXtqSweJ EEMDQi+JUmnbhsDBzEcNXcqWiAVcS47714JcGvDX1VQDajHJxoHsm/q1PSR6MfMm0Adl AQauPzjSe8NuXUxIvkiVhy1bELKXje1lgLYuTbNghVUrqwiY3yCbRSvW3U0AvCKeZ188 jJ7nFDiBi+uOAaCAbKgz78I7pN2NOlFa1I8MmVR5QomPL9Um2s2mzVLRQsDk8qyNvSdK MoCVVGtqnqcJEOcdVnvRrcf+vchzHQ+ZglLG3LPhHZ5VJd/vYuEAVSxhjCazW6sJTyEM Paiw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQluPDLOt8fqpVhAWk59wEevFljWHzlZUGzLmlNp0o5vMwzbd2pYF4my12cmsEcecHDPGYJP X-Received: by 10.140.107.229 with SMTP id h92mr8914592qgf.30.1397649521360; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 04:58:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from RiepD630 (pool-108-49-217-37.bstnma.fios.verizon.net. [108.49.217.37]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id p2sm43110959qah.38.2014.04.16.04.58.40 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 16 Apr 2014 04:58:41 -0700 (PDT) From: "Frits Riep" To: "'Dave Taht'" References: In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 07:58:22 -0400 Message-ID: <012a01cf596b$2ad971e0$808c55a0$@com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: Ac9Y7nN7Sxbf5sLFTWiwJa/XRHiO9QAePuwA Content-Language: en-us Cc: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] Network behavior of Moca bridges X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 11:58:43 -0000 Dave, I am willing to help. It is interesting information. Also that the = powerline extenders have the same issue, which is really unfortunate. = To do any testing, I will need to install a second moca adapter as I = currently have only one installed to connect to the TV set top boxed = from Verizon FIOS. Other than testing for latency through a Moca bridged connection, vs = directly connected through Ethernet, is there any specific = recommendation on how to test to get meaningful information? Btw, the current release of CeroWRT using fq_codel sqm is excellent at = controlling bufferbloat both on the wired and wireless connections - so = kudos to all the hard work that has been done! Only a few days so far, = but I am very impressed with the results. (hopefully we are about to = call this the new stable). I may not be able to test the moca setup until the weekend as all of my = clients who waited forever to replace their XP systems now find it to be = critical and so we have a very high number of small businesses replacing = xp systems with our currently recommended Windows 7 Pro x64. I think in most cases the Moca bridges are primarily feeding streaming = video and control info to set top boxes and I would think bufferbloat = would be not a real high concern in those applications. Powerline adaptors are used pretty often to extend Ethernet to systems = which are difficult or expensive to wire to, and in situations where = wireless signals are weak or unreliable. Bufferbloat for these devices = would be much more problematic for these applications as it includes web = browsing and other latency sensitive uses. Frits -----Original Message----- From: Dave Taht [mailto:dave.taht@gmail.com]=20 Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2014 5:06 PM To: Frits Riep Cc: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net Subject: Network behavior of Moca bridges I'd like to note that I've got several private reports of really bad, = oft bufferbloated and (also underbuffered!) behavior on moca bridges, = and if you are in a position to benchmark such, more public data on the = problems would be nice. It generally looks like the same folk that designed homeplug products = were involved in moca, with similar behaviors as described below with = hardware flow control and the like, in addition to possible = underbuffering and issues with shared media backoffs... http://caia.swin.edu.au/reports/130121A/CAIA-TR-130121A.pdf http://caia.swin.edu.au/reports/130417A/CAIA-TR-130417A.pdf But we lack hard public data on how the moca devices actually work or = public testing.