[Cerowrt-devel] AQM and ADSL

[Cerowrt-devel] AQM and ADSL

[Fred Stratton]

(apologies for wrecking the list, and introducing email addresses in error)


Begin forwarded message
> On 13 Aug 2013, at 19:53, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
> 
>> H Fred
>> On Aug 13, 2013, at 17:28 , Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:
>> 
>>> I have been experimenting with the two sets of modified sets of scripts and AQM panels. Thank you for constructing them.
>> 
>> 	Thanks for testing...
>> 
>>> 
>>> To mention the string ''for ATM choose' is repeated erroneously in the extended panel.
>> 
>> 	Fixed… I will try to test whether it actually works before sending the next version...
>> 
>>> 
>>> The scripts work.
>>> 
>>> The link layer giving best results is ethernet.
>> 
>> 	What and how did you measure? Using "use HTB's private mechanism for linklayer and overhead" or "Use tc's stab mechanism for linklayer and overhead"? A little browsing of the kernel source makes me believe that the HTB version is fully busted and will not do anything at all (so I would have imagined adel atm and ethernet to behave the same). I am thinking about how to test whether a link layer adjustment works or not.
> 
> Ein Fehler. I had both chosen. They are mutually exclusive options.  2 days of testing lost. Shall restart.
>> 
>> 
>>> Pinging severs whilst running Netalyzr has no effect.
>> 
>> 	Not being a native english speaker cloud you be more explicit, please. Was the ping RTT affected by the concurrent netalyzr run (especially up- and download testing)? Did you get netsurf-wrapper to work on ubuntu? 
> 
> You did not understand because I explained what I did, and I did the wrong thing.
> 
> Not done properly. Will retry. Netsurf-wrapper will not compile. I am going to move to a more recent version of Ubuntu.
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> The tone buckets of the phone signal are translated into ATM packets by the DSP in the 2 Wire 2700. I have no idea what this closed source BSD implementation does to the packets before they are sent to CeroWRT.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> I am using 3.10.2-1, as I cannot get the latest version to install with sys upgrade.
> 
> I was trying 3.10.5-1 
> 
> DT has taken to stealth with his releases.
> 
>> 
>> 	So 3.10.6-1 fails with sysupgrade?
>> 
>> best
>> 	Sebastian
>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>> 
> 

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] AQM and ADSL

[Dave Taht]

On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 12:40 PM, Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:

>>
>> DT has taken to stealth with his releases.

Heh. No, these are not releases. If I don't get a chance to do some
testing I don't post their existence to the list.

I don't mind people being eager and willing to test 'em without me
doing so, tho.

To explain, I do what's called "continuous integration" whenever
possible (see wikipedia)

Big triggers for that are new kernel releases (like 3.10.6), fixes
like the boatload that felix just landed for the ethernet and the wifi
aggregation rework, and tossing in a new version of the codel patches,
and tossing in the AQM stuff that sebastian just did - and all that
landed in 3.10.6-1.

Merely getting this stuff to compile is often a chore. In fact, it
took me all day to get all that to work... and my only spare router I
dare sacrifice (the other 4 in the testbed are doing some benchmarks
as I write) is still in my suitcase and in the car.

Usually I get around to announcing a "development release" once it's
been tested for a little while, at least a quick check, and preferably
a couple hours under heavy load, and usually that will be at least a
-3. I generally try to stay away from X.Y.0 and wait for X.Y.1...

We still have a few things left to fold into this kernel - notably the
new htb patches from jesper and to backport a few other fixes from
net-next, and it looks like the changes to the AQM thing need a
smarter radio box in the gui(?). I'm also trying to freeze the ubnt
picostation and nanostation on the same stuff (and what's causing even
more delay is trying to get a guruplug and edgerouter booted with it
too. I've always resisted expanding the scope of the cerowrt project
to more hardware, but I need two higher power boxes to drive some
tests with desparately)

I'm off to do my laundry in a bit, and will return with fresh clothes
and that router this evening.

I would very much like to get to a new "stable" release this month,
it's been far too long since the last one! But to do that we have to
have zero crash bugs, and be "feature complete". I think we are close
to zero crashes (but felix fiddling with the ethernet and the wifi
recently scares me and I still haven't checked to see if sysupgrade
worked in a couple releases (I flash via tftp usually)), but there are
some nagging features that I'd like to get in there. Like this one.
Keep plugging away, please.

Are there any other must-have features for this puppy? I've been
looking over gargoyle's ACC code in particular.

>>
>>>
>>>      So 3.10.6-1 fails with sysupgrade?
>>>
>>> best
>>>      Sebastian
>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>>>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel



-- 
Dave Täht

Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt: http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.html

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] AQM and ADSL

[Fred Stratton]

Thank you. That is a useful explanation.

Incorporation requests

Gargoyle AAC
htb fixes.


On 13 Aug 2013, at 21:33, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 12:40 PM, Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:
> 
>>> 
>>> DT has taken to stealth with his releases.
> 
> Heh. No, these are not releases. If I don't get a chance to do some
> testing I don't post their existence to the list.
> 
> I don't mind people being eager and willing to test 'em without me
> doing so, tho.
> 
> To explain, I do what's called "continuous integration" whenever
> possible (see wikipedia)
> 
> Big triggers for that are new kernel releases (like 3.10.6), fixes
> like the boatload that felix just landed for the ethernet and the wifi
> aggregation rework, and tossing in a new version of the codel patches,
> and tossing in the AQM stuff that sebastian just did - and all that
> landed in 3.10.6-1.
> 
> Merely getting this stuff to compile is often a chore. In fact, it
> took me all day to get all that to work... and my only spare router I
> dare sacrifice (the other 4 in the testbed are doing some benchmarks
> as I write) is still in my suitcase and in the car.
> 
> Usually I get around to announcing a "development release" once it's
> been tested for a little while, at least a quick check, and preferably
> a couple hours under heavy load, and usually that will be at least a
> -3. I generally try to stay away from X.Y.0 and wait for X.Y.1...
> 
> We still have a few things left to fold into this kernel - notably the
> new htb patches from jesper and to backport a few other fixes from
> net-next, and it looks like the changes to the AQM thing need a
> smarter radio box in the gui(?). I'm also trying to freeze the ubnt
> picostation and nanostation on the same stuff (and what's causing even
> more delay is trying to get a guruplug and edgerouter booted with it
> too. I've always resisted expanding the scope of the cerowrt project
> to more hardware, but I need two higher power boxes to drive some
> tests with desparately)
> 
> I'm off to do my laundry in a bit, and will return with fresh clothes
> and that router this evening.
> 
> I would very much like to get to a new "stable" release this month,
> it's been far too long since the last one! But to do that we have to
> have zero crash bugs, and be "feature complete". I think we are close
> to zero crashes (but felix fiddling with the ethernet and the wifi
> recently scares me and I still haven't checked to see if sysupgrade
> worked in a couple releases (I flash via tftp usually)), but there are
> some nagging features that I'd like to get in there. Like this one.
> Keep plugging away, please.
> 
> Are there any other must-have features for this puppy? I've been
> looking over gargoyle's ACC code in particular.
> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>     So 3.10.6-1 fails with sysupgrade?
>>>> 
>>>> best
>>>>     Sebastian
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>>>>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Dave Täht
> 
> Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt: http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.html

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] AQM and ADSL

[Fred Stratton]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5415 bytes --]


On 14 Aug 2013, at 12:42, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:

> Hi Fred,
> 
> 
> On Aug 13, 2013, at 21:40 , Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:
> 
>> (apologies for wrecking the list, and introducing email addresses in error)
>> 
>> 
>> Begin forwarded message
>>> On 13 Aug 2013, at 19:53, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> H Fred
>>>> On Aug 13, 2013, at 17:28 , Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> I have been experimenting with the two sets of modified sets of scripts and AQM panels. Thank you for constructing them.
>>>> 
>>>> 	Thanks for testing...
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> To mention the string ''for ATM choose' is repeated erroneously in the extended panel.
>>>> 
>>>> 	Fixed… I will try to test whether it actually works before sending the next version...
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> The scripts work.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The link layer giving best results is ethernet.
>>>> 
>>>> 	What and how did you measure? Using "use HTB's private mechanism for linklayer and overhead" or "Use tc's stab mechanism for linklayer and overhead"? A little browsing of the kernel source makes me believe that the HTB version is fully busted and will not do anything at all (so I would have imagined adel atm and ethernet to behave the same). I am thinking about how to test whether a link layer adjustment works or not.
>>> 
>>> Ein Fehler. I had both chosen. They are mutually exclusive options.  2 days of testing lost. Shall restart.
> 
> 	I will try to fix the AQM scripts to make these two mutually exclusive. That said, the HTB internal implementation does not seem to work at all, so enabling both should be equivalent to just enabling stab. In my quick and dirty testing (using netsurf-wrapper, which I got working on macosx 10.8) it looks like activating both actually should work. BTW I am looking for an open netsurf server in Europe anybody any ideas?

I am actually getting better results from htb than td-stab at present.
> 
> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> Pinging severs whilst running Netalyzr has no effect.
>>>> 
>>>> 	Not being a native english speaker cloud you be more explicit, please. Was the ping RTT affected by the concurrent netalyzr run (especially up- and download testing)? Did you get netsurf-wrapper to work on ubuntu? 
>>> 
>>> You did not understand because I explained what I did, and I did the wrong thing.
>>> 
>>> Not done properly. Will retry. Netsurf-wrapper will not compile. I am going to move to a more recent version of Ubuntu.
> 
> 	Interesting, I managed to install it under 64bit Ubuntu 12.04 in a virtual machine, using the packages Toke supplied. I just added http://archive.tohojo.dk/ to "Software Sources" in "Update Manager" than I could use the "Synaptic Package Manager" to install netperf and netperf-wrapper from Toke's repository; so I guess no ned to compile anything. (Under maces however installing netsurf-wrapper was slightly more involved as the recommended way via pip did not work, so I had to download the netperf-wrapper repository from https://github.com/tohojo/netperf-wrapper and the cd into the downloaded directory and issue "sudo python2.7 ./setup.py install" there and I had to symplink python2.7 to python2, but after that it also worked).
> 	Just as a illustration what to expect, please find attached the RRUL results with stab based AQM und without any AQM; clearly fq_codel improves the ping RTTs a lot, so AQM works. Alas, I did not repeat this test with shaping enabled but no link layer adjustments or with the HTB link layer adjustments, so can not really tell, whether RRUL is sensitive enough to show the effects of link layer adjustments or not (my bet is on not as RRUL in my understanding uses large packets while the ATM quantization effects are strongest for small packets). I might try to do this tonight or when I get around to do it…
> 	I would be really curious to see such plots from your setup for comparison.

Will try your suggestion for Ubuntu.


>  
> <figure_5.png><figure_6_like_5_noAQM.png>
> 
> 
> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> The tone buckets of the phone signal are translated into ATM packets by the DSP in the 2 Wire 2700. I have no idea what this closed source BSD implementation does to the packets before they are sent to CeroWRT.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> I am using 3.10.2-1, as I cannot get the latest version to install with sys upgrade.
>>> 
>>> I was trying 3.10.5-1 
> 
> 	Ah, good, I might try 3.10.6-1 then directly in tftp mode. Does anyone know how much time I have between releasing the reset button and starting the tftp transfer? 
> 
sys upgrade does not work with the latest build. If you have to press the recovery button during restart, I cannot se tftp. Does anyone know of programmatic alternatives?

> Best
> 	Sebastian
> 
> 
>>> 
>>> DT has taken to stealth with his releases.
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 	So 3.10.6-1 fails with sysupgrade?
>>>> 
>>>> best
>>>> 	Sebastian
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>>>>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
> 


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 8508 bytes --]

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] AQM and ADSL

[Sebastian Moeller]

Hi Dave,


On Aug 13, 2013, at 22:33 , Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 12:40 PM, Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:
> 
>>> 
>>> DT has taken to stealth with his releases.
> 
> Heh. No, these are not releases. If I don't get a chance to do some
> testing I don't post their existence to the list.
> 
> I don't mind people being eager and willing to test 'em without me
> doing so, tho.
> 
> To explain, I do what's called "continuous integration" whenever
> possible (see wikipedia)

	Ah, understood, I guess continuous testing works well with this approach :)


> 
> Big triggers for that are new kernel releases (like 3.10.6), fixes
> like the boatload that felix just landed for the ethernet and the wifi
> aggregation rework, and tossing in a new version of the codel patches,
> and tossing in the AQM stuff that sebastian just did - and all that
> landed in 3.10.6-1.
> 
> Merely getting this stuff to compile is often a chore. In fact, it
> took me all day to get all that to work... and my only spare router I
> dare sacrifice (the other 4 in the testbed are doing some benchmarks
> as I write) is still in my suitcase and in the car.
> 
> Usually I get around to announcing a "development release" once it's
> been tested for a little while, at least a quick check, and preferably
> a couple hours under heavy load, and usually that will be at least a
> -3. I generally try to stay away from X.Y.0 and wait for X.Y.1...
> 
> We still have a few things left to fold into this kernel - notably the
> new htb patches from jesper and to backport a few other fixes from
> net-next, and it looks like the changes to the AQM thing need a
> smarter radio box in the gui(?).

	Ah, yes, I was looking for radio buttons initially came up blank, then failed to get LUCI's :depends mechanism work properly and just resorted to exposing both checkboxes. Far from ideal, I guess in the next iteration I will just have a drop down bow with "none", "htb", "stab" then it will be unambiguous.

> I'm also trying to freeze the ubnt
> picostation and nanostation on the same stuff (and what's causing even
> more delay is trying to get a guruplug and edgerouter booted with it
> too. I've always resisted expanding the scope of the cerowrt project
> to more hardware, but I need two higher power boxes to drive some
> tests with desperately)

	More hardware, more pain? I wonder, have you found a successor to the WNDR3[7|8]00 yet?

> 
> I'm off to do my laundry in a bit, and will return with fresh clothes
> and that router this evening.
> 
> I would very much like to get to a new "stable" release this month,
> it's been far too long since the last one! But to do that we have to
> have zero crash bugs

	Okay, not that it is conclusive, but 3.10.1-1did not crash on me once.

> , and be "feature complete". I think we are close
> to zero crashes (but felix fiddling with the ethernet and the wifi
> recently scares me and I still haven't checked to see if sysupgrade
> worked in a couple releases (I flash via tftp usually)), but there are
> some nagging features that I'd like to get in there.

	So are Felix changes already in 3.10.6? If so I will ahead and try to sysupgrade it (I always can fall back to TFTP even if it is a bit inconvenient due to positioning the router above my reach :) )

> Like this one.
> Keep plugging away, please.
> 
> Are there any other must-have features for this puppy? I've been
> looking over gargoyle's ACC code in particular.


Many Thanks & Best Regards
	Sebastian


> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>     So 3.10.6-1 fails with sysupgrade?
>>>> 
>>>> best
>>>>     Sebastian
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>>>>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Dave Täht
> 
> Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt: http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.html
> _______________________________________________
> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] AQM and ADSL

[Sebastian Moeller]

Hi Fred,


On Aug 14, 2013, at 14:01 , Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:

> 
> On 14 Aug 2013, at 12:42, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Fred,
>> 
>> 
>> On Aug 13, 2013, at 21:40 , Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:
>> 
>>> (apologies for wrecking the list, and introducing email addresses in error)
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Begin forwarded message
>>>> On 13 Aug 2013, at 19:53, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> H Fred
>>>>> On Aug 13, 2013, at 17:28 , Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> I have been experimenting with the two sets of modified sets of scripts and AQM panels. Thank you for constructing them.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 	Thanks for testing...
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> To mention the string ''for ATM choose' is repeated erroneously in the extended panel.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 	Fixed… I will try to test whether it actually works before sending the next version...
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The scripts work.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The link layer giving best results is ethernet.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 	What and how did you measure? Using "use HTB's private mechanism for linklayer and overhead" or "Use tc's stab mechanism for linklayer and overhead"? A little browsing of the kernel source makes me believe that the HTB version is fully busted and will not do anything at all (so I would have imagined adel atm and ethernet to behave the same). I am thinking about how to test whether a link layer adjustment works or not.
>>>> 
>>>> Ein Fehler. I had both chosen. They are mutually exclusive options.  2 days of testing lost. Shall restart.
>> 
>> 	I will try to fix the AQM scripts to make these two mutually exclusive. That said, the HTB internal implementation does not seem to work at all, so enabling both should be equivalent to just enabling stab. In my quick and dirty testing (using netsurf-wrapper, which I got working on macosx 10.8) it looks like activating both actually should work. BTW I am looking for an open netsurf server in Europe anybody any ideas?
> 
> I am actually getting better results from htb than td-stab at present.

	Then I will have to test an compare the RRUL performance for stab-linklayeradjustments (loa), htb-lla, no-lla, no-shaping at all, at 50% of link rate and at say 80% of link rate and see which performs best. Alas I need a closer netperf 2.6.0 net server binary than the ones in NY and CA. So far I am failing to find a windows binary I could run on one of the machines in the lab…
	How do you measure currently? I would love to run the same tests to figure out what is up with the two loa methods.


>> 
>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Pinging severs whilst running Netalyzr has no effect.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 	Not being a native english speaker cloud you be more explicit, please. Was the ping RTT affected by the concurrent netalyzr run (especially up- and download testing)? Did you get netsurf-wrapper to work on ubuntu? 
>>>> 
>>>> You did not understand because I explained what I did, and I did the wrong thing.
>>>> 
>>>> Not done properly. Will retry. Netsurf-wrapper will not compile. I am going to move to a more recent version of Ubuntu.
>> 
>> 	Interesting, I managed to install it under 64bit Ubuntu 12.04 in a virtual machine, using the packages Toke supplied. I just added http://archive.tohojo.dk/ to "Software Sources" in "Update Manager" than I could use the "Synaptic Package Manager" to install netperf and netperf-wrapper from Toke's repository; so I guess no ned to compile anything. (Under maces however installing netsurf-wrapper was slightly more involved as the recommended way via pip did not work, so I had to download the netperf-wrapper repository from https://github.com/tohojo/netperf-wrapper and the cd into the downloaded directory and issue "sudo python2.7 ./setup.py install" there and I had to symplink python2.7 to python2, but after that it also worked).
>> 	Just as a illustration what to expect, please find attached the RRUL results with stab based AQM und without any AQM; clearly fq_codel improves the ping RTTs a lot, so AQM works. Alas, I did not repeat this test with shaping enabled but no link layer adjustments or with the HTB link layer adjustments, so can not really tell, whether RRUL is sensitive enough to show the effects of link layer adjustments or not (my bet is on not as RRUL in my understanding uses large packets while the ATM quantization effects are strongest for small packets). I might try to do this tonight or when I get around to do it…
>> 	I would be really curious to see such plots from your setup for comparison.
> 
> Will try your suggestion for Ubuntu.
> 
> 
>>  
>> <figure_5.png><figure_6_like_5_noAQM.png>
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The tone buckets of the phone signal are translated into ATM packets by the DSP in the 2 Wire 2700. I have no idea what this closed source BSD implementation does to the packets before they are sent to CeroWRT.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I am using 3.10.2-1, as I cannot get the latest version to install with sys upgrade.
>>>> 
>>>> I was trying 3.10.5-1 
>> 
>> 	Ah, good, I might try 3.10.6-1 then directly in tftp mode. Does anyone know how much time I have between releasing the reset button and starting the tftp transfer? 
>> 
> sys upgrade does not work with the latest build. If you have to press the recovery button during restart, I cannot se tftp. Does anyone know of programmatic alternatives?

	Ah, then is is going to be TFTP I guess. What do you mean by "If you have to press the recovery button during restart, I cannot se tftp"? Does the "reboot-with-reset-button-pressed" not work after a failed sys upgrade?

Best Regards
	Sebastian


>> Best
>> 	Sebastian
>> 
>> 
>>>> 
>>>> DT has taken to stealth with his releases.
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 	So 3.10.6-1 fails with sysupgrade?
>>>>> 
>>>>> best
>>>>> 	Sebastian
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>>>>>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel

[Cerowrt-devel] Fwd: AQM and ADSL

[Fred Stratton]

{sent to wrong address)
Begin forwarded message:

> 
> Hi Fred,
> 
> 
> On Aug 14, 2013, at 14:01 , Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On 14 Aug 2013, at 12:42, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Fred,
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Aug 13, 2013, at 21:40 , Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> (apologies for wrecking the list, and introducing email addresses in error)
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Begin forwarded message
>>>>> On 13 Aug 2013, at 19:53, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> H Fred
>>>>>> On Aug 13, 2013, at 17:28 , Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I have been experimenting with the two sets of modified sets of scripts and AQM panels. Thank you for constructing them.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 	Thanks for testing...
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> To mention the string ''for ATM choose' is repeated erroneously in the extended panel.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 	Fixed… I will try to test whether it actually works before sending the next version...
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The scripts work.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The link layer giving best results is ethernet.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 	What and how did you measure? Using "use HTB's private mechanism for linklayer and overhead" or "Use tc's stab mechanism for linklayer and overhead"? A little browsing of the kernel source makes me believe that the HTB version is fully busted and will not do anything at all (so I would have imagined adel atm and ethernet to behave the same). I am thinking about how to test whether a link layer adjustment works or not.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Ein Fehler. I had both chosen. They are mutually exclusive options.  2 days of testing lost. Shall restart.
>>> 
>>> 	I will try to fix the AQM scripts to make these two mutually exclusive. That said, the HTB internal implementation does not seem to work at all, so enabling both should be equivalent to just enabling stab. In my quick and dirty testing (using netsurf-wrapper, which I got working on macosx 10.8) it looks like activating both actually should work. BTW I am looking for an open netsurf server in Europe anybody any ideas?
>> 
>> I am actually getting better results from htb than td-stab at present.
> 
> 	Then I will have to test an compare the RRUL performance for stab-linklayeradjustments (loa), htb-lla, no-lla, no-shaping at all, at 50% of link rate and at say 80% of link rate and see which performs best. Alas I need a closer netperf 2.6.0 net server binary than the ones in NY and CA. So far I am failing to find a windows binary I could run on one of the machines in the lab…
> 	How do you measure currently? I would love to run the same tests to figure out what is up with the two loa methods.
> 
> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Pinging severs whilst running Netalyzr has no effect.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 	Not being a native english speaker cloud you be more explicit, please. Was the ping RTT affected by the concurrent netalyzr run (especially up- and download testing)? Did you get netsurf-wrapper to work on ubuntu? 
>>>>> 
>>>>> You did not understand because I explained what I did, and I did the wrong thing.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Not done properly. Will retry. Netsurf-wrapper will not compile. I am going to move to a more recent version of Ubuntu.
>>> 
>>> 	Interesting, I managed to install it under 64bit Ubuntu 12.04 in a virtual machine, using the packages Toke supplied. I just added http://archive.tohojo.dk/ to "Software Sources" in "Update Manager" than I could use the "Synaptic Package Manager" to install netperf and netperf-wrapper from Toke's repository; so I guess no ned to compile anything. (Under maces however installing netsurf-wrapper was slightly more involved as the recommended way via pip did not work, so I had to download the netperf-wrapper repository from https://github.com/tohojo/netperf-wrapper and the cd into the downloaded directory and issue "sudo python2.7 ./setup.py install" there and I had to symplink python2.7 to python2, but after that it also worked).
>>> 	Just as a illustration what to expect, please find attached the RRUL results with stab based AQM und without any AQM; clearly fq_codel improves the ping RTTs a lot, so AQM works. Alas, I did not repeat this test with shaping enabled but no link layer adjustments or with the HTB link layer adjustments, so can not really tell, whether RRUL is sensitive enough to show the effects of link layer adjustments or not (my bet is on not as RRUL in my understanding uses large packets while the ATM quantization effects are strongest for small packets). I might try to do this tonight or when I get around to do it…
>>> 	I would be really curious to see such plots from your setup for comparison.
>> 
>> Will try your suggestion for Ubuntu.
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> <figure_5.png><figure_6_like_5_noAQM.png>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The tone buckets of the phone signal are translated into ATM packets by the DSP in the 2 Wire 2700. I have no idea what this closed source BSD implementation does to the packets before they are sent to CeroWRT.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I am using 3.10.2-1, as I cannot get the latest version to install with sys upgrade.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I was trying 3.10.5-1 
>>> 
>>> 	Ah, good, I might try 3.10.6-1 then directly in tftp mode. Does anyone know how much time I have between releasing the reset button and starting the tftp transfer? 
>>> 
>> sys upgrade does not work with the latest build. If you have to press the recovery button during restart, I cannot se tftp. Does anyone know of programmatic alternatives?
> 
> 	Ah, then is is going to be TFTP I guess. What do you mean by "If you have to press the recovery button during restart, I cannot se tftp"? Does the "reboot-with-reset-button-pressed" not work after a failed sys upgrade?
> 
> Best Regards
> 	Sebastian
> 
> 
>>> Best
>>> 	Sebastian
>>> 
>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> DT has taken to stealth with his releases.
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 	So 3.10.6-1 fails with sysupgrade?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> best
>>>>>> 	Sebastian
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>>>>>>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>>>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
> 

[Cerowrt-devel] Fwd: AQM and ADSL

[Fred Stratton]

Begin forwarded message:

> 
> 
> 
> On 14 Aug 2013, at 14:31, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Fred,
>> 
>> 
>> On Aug 14, 2013, at 14:01 , Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> On 14 Aug 2013, at 12:42, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Hi Fred,
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Aug 13, 2013, at 21:40 , Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> (apologies for wrecking the list, and introducing email addresses in error)
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Begin forwarded message
>>>>>> On 13 Aug 2013, at 19:53, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> H Fred
>>>>>>> On Aug 13, 2013, at 17:28 , Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I have been experimenting with the two sets of modified sets of scripts and AQM panels. Thank you for constructing them.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 	Thanks for testing...
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> To mention the string ''for ATM choose' is repeated erroneously in the extended panel.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 	Fixed… I will try to test whether it actually works before sending the next version...
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> The scripts work.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> The link layer giving best results is ethernet.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 	What and how did you measure? Using "use HTB's private mechanism for linklayer and overhead" or "Use tc's stab mechanism for linklayer and overhead"? A little browsing of the kernel source makes me believe that the HTB version is fully busted and will not do anything at all (so I would have imagined adel atm and ethernet to behave the same). I am thinking about how to test whether a link layer adjustment works or not.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Ein Fehler. I had both chosen. They are mutually exclusive options.  2 days of testing lost. Shall restart.
>>>> 
>>>> 	I will try to fix the AQM scripts to make these two mutually exclusive. That said, the HTB internal implementation does not seem to work at all, so enabling both should be equivalent to just enabling stab. In my quick and dirty testing (using netsurf-wrapper, which I got working on macosx 10.8) it looks like activating both actually should work. BTW I am looking for an open netsurf server in Europe anybody any ideas?
>>> 
>>> I am actually getting better results from htb than td-stab at present.
>> 
>> 	Then I will have to test an compare the RRUL performance for stab-linklayeradjustments (loa), htb-lla, no-lla, no-shaping at all, at 50% of link rate and at say 80% of link rate and see which performs best. Alas I need a closer netperf 2.6.0 net server binary than the ones in NY and CA. So far I am failing to find a windows binary I could run on one of the machines in the lab…
>> 	How do you measure currently? I would love to run the same tests to figure out what is up with the two loa methods.
> 
> Netalyzr, for all its deficiencies.
>> 
>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Pinging severs whilst running Netalyzr has no effect.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 	Not being a native english speaker cloud you be more explicit, please. Was the ping RTT affected by the concurrent netalyzr run (especially up- and download testing)? Did you get netsurf-wrapper to work on ubuntu? 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> You did not understand because I explained what I did, and I did the wrong thing.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Not done properly. Will retry. Netsurf-wrapper will not compile. I am going to move to a more recent version of Ubuntu.
>>>> 
>>>> 	Interesting, I managed to install it under 64bit Ubuntu 12.04 in a virtual machine, using the packages Toke supplied. I just added http://archive.tohojo.dk/ to "Software Sources" in "Update Manager" than I could use the "Synaptic Package Manager" to install netperf and netperf-wrapper from Toke's repository; so I guess no ned to compile anything. (Under maces however installing netsurf-wrapper was slightly more involved as the recommended way via pip did not work, so I had to download the netperf-wrapper repository from https://github.com/tohojo/netperf-wrapper and the cd into the downloaded directory and issue "sudo python2.7 ./setup.py install" there and I had to symplink python2.7 to python2, but after that it also worked).
>>>> 	Just as a illustration what to expect, please find attached the RRUL results with stab based AQM und without any AQM; clearly fq_codel improves the ping RTTs a lot, so AQM works. Alas, I did not repeat this test with shaping enabled but no link layer adjustments or with the HTB link layer adjustments, so can not really tell, whether RRUL is sensitive enough to show the effects of link layer adjustments or not (my bet is on not as RRUL in my understanding uses large packets while the ATM quantization effects are strongest for small packets). I might try to do this tonight or when I get around to do it…
>>>> 	I would be really curious to see such plots from your setup for comparison.
>>> 
>>> Will try your suggestion for Ubuntu.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> <figure_5.png><figure_6_like_5_noAQM.png>
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> The tone buckets of the phone signal are translated into ATM packets by the DSP in the 2 Wire 2700. I have no idea what this closed source BSD implementation does to the packets before they are sent to CeroWRT.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I am using 3.10.2-1, as I cannot get the latest version to install with sys upgrade.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I was trying 3.10.5-1 
>>>> 
>>>> 	Ah, good, I might try 3.10.6-1 then directly in tftp mode. Does anyone know how much time I have between releasing the reset button and starting the tftp transfer? 
>>>> 
>>> sys upgrade does not work with the latest build. If you have to press the recovery button during restart, I cannot se tftp. Does anyone know of programmatic alternatives?
>> 
>> 	Ah, then is is going to be TFTP I guess. What do you mean by "If you have to press the recovery button during restart, I cannot se tftp"? Does the "reboot-with-reset-button-pressed" not work after a failed sys upgrade?
> 
> I  cannot press the reset button whilst restart in the router. The procedure works, but I cannot do it. I am looking for an alternative. There will be a programmatic approach to enter kernel mode.
>> 
>> Best Regards
>> 	Sebastian
>> 
>> 
>>>> Best
>>>> 	Sebastian
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> DT has taken to stealth with his releases.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 	So 3.10.6-1 fails with sysupgrade?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> best
>>>>>>> 	Sebastian
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>>>>>>>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>>>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>>>>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>> 
> 

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] AQM and ADSL

[Sebastian Moeller]

Hi Fred,


On Aug 14, 2013, at 15:37 , Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:

> 
> On 14 Aug 2013, at 14:31, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Fred,
>> 
>> 
>> On Aug 14, 2013, at 14:01 , Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> On 14 Aug 2013, at 12:42, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Hi Fred,
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Aug 13, 2013, at 21:40 , Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> (apologies for wrecking the list, and introducing email addresses in error)
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Begin forwarded message
>>>>>> On 13 Aug 2013, at 19:53, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> H Fred
>>>>>>> On Aug 13, 2013, at 17:28 , Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I have been experimenting with the two sets of modified sets of scripts and AQM panels. Thank you for constructing them.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 	Thanks for testing...
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> To mention the string ''for ATM choose' is repeated erroneously in the extended panel.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 	Fixed… I will try to test whether it actually works before sending the next version...
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> The scripts work.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> The link layer giving best results is ethernet.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 	What and how did you measure? Using "use HTB's private mechanism for linklayer and overhead" or "Use tc's stab mechanism for linklayer and overhead"? A little browsing of the kernel source makes me believe that the HTB version is fully busted and will not do anything at all (so I would have imagined adel atm and ethernet to behave the same). I am thinking about how to test whether a link layer adjustment works or not.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Ein Fehler. I had both chosen. They are mutually exclusive options.  2 days of testing lost. Shall restart.
>>>> 
>>>> 	I will try to fix the AQM scripts to make these two mutually exclusive. That said, the HTB internal implementation does not seem to work at all, so enabling both should be equivalent to just enabling stab. In my quick and dirty testing (using netsurf-wrapper, which I got working on macosx 10.8) it looks like activating both actually should work. BTW I am looking for an open netsurf server in Europe anybody any ideas?
>>> 
>>> I am actually getting better results from htb than td-stab at present.
>> 
>> 	Then I will have to test an compare the RRUL performance for stab-linklayeradjustments (loa), htb-lla, no-lla, no-shaping at all, at 50% of link rate and at say 80% of link rate and see which performs best. Alas I need a closer netperf 2.6.0 net server binary than the ones in NY and CA. So far I am failing to find a windows binary I could run on one of the machines in the lab…
>> 	How do you measure currently? I would love to run the same tests to figure out what is up with the two loa methods.
> 
> Netalyzr, for all its deficiencies.

	Ah, so you are basically testing the maximum depth of the ge00 uplink fq_codels, which is set at 600 at the moment. You could test this by changing the value in egress() if simple.qos

$TC qdisc add dev $IFACE parent 1:11 handle 110: $QDISC limit 600 $NOECN `get_quantum 300` `get_flows ${PRIO_RATE}`
$TC qdisc add dev $IFACE parent 1:12 handle 120: $QDISC limit 600 $NOECN `get_quantum 300` `get_flows ${BE_RATE}`
$TC qdisc add dev $IFACE parent 1:13 handle 130: $QDISC limit 600 $NOECN `get_quantum 300` `get_flows ${BK_RATE}`

to 

$TC qdisc add dev $IFACE parent 1:11 handle 110: $QDISC limit 300 $NOECN `get_quantum 300` `get_flows ${PRIO_RATE}`
$TC qdisc add dev $IFACE parent 1:12 handle 120: $QDISC limit 300 $NOECN `get_quantum 300` `get_flows ${BE_RATE}`
$TC qdisc add dev $IFACE parent 1:13 handle 130: $QDISC limit 300 $NOECN `get_quantum 300` `get_flows ${BK_RATE}`

and the reported buffering will get lower… I assume that netalyzr only complains about the uplink and the downlink is okay? Setting limit higher will make netalyzr more unhappy (up to a certain number over which netalyzr will get happy again). I assume netalyzr simply uses an inelastic UDP load of a fixed bandwidth tries to fill buffers until dropping occurs and deduces the size of the buffer from the amount of data that passed before dropping, if all fits into the buffer nothing needs dropping and hence netalyzr should be happy even though the buffers just got more bloated. 

	You could also try http://loki10.mpi-sws.mpg.de/bb/bb.php for that kind of a test which IIRC uses higher bandwidth probes.


But we have been there in the past, see https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/cerowrt-devel/2012-August/000418.html the critical test is to see whether a concurrent ping or ssh session stays responsive in spite of the netalyzr probe… And interestingly in the old e-mail cited, no AQM defaulted to 500ms uplink delay, the cable modems buffer was simply not enormously oversized to begin with… 

	Could you share the netalyzr numbers for no AQM, AQM with HTB and AQM with stab, in any way? And in case you can run this how do the ping statistics (example:

--- www.heise.de ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 5.813/6.120/6.619/0.213 ms

of a concurrent "ping -c 1000 IPADDRESS.OF.NEAREST>ISPHOST" look, especially the max and stddev values could be interesting...


>> 
>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Pinging severs whilst running Netalyzr has no effect.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 	Not being a native english speaker cloud you be more explicit, please. Was the ping RTT affected by the concurrent netalyzr run (especially up- and download testing)? Did you get netsurf-wrapper to work on ubuntu? 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> You did not understand because I explained what I did, and I did the wrong thing.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Not done properly. Will retry. Netsurf-wrapper will not compile. I am going to move to a more recent version of Ubuntu.
>>>> 
>>>> 	Interesting, I managed to install it under 64bit Ubuntu 12.04 in a virtual machine, using the packages Toke supplied. I just added http://archive.tohojo.dk/ to "Software Sources" in "Update Manager" than I could use the "Synaptic Package Manager" to install netperf and netperf-wrapper from Toke's repository; so I guess no ned to compile anything. (Under maces however installing netsurf-wrapper was slightly more involved as the recommended way via pip did not work, so I had to download the netperf-wrapper repository from https://github.com/tohojo/netperf-wrapper and the cd into the downloaded directory and issue "sudo python2.7 ./setup.py install" there and I had to symplink python2.7 to python2, but after that it also worked).
>>>> 	Just as a illustration what to expect, please find attached the RRUL results with stab based AQM und without any AQM; clearly fq_codel improves the ping RTTs a lot, so AQM works. Alas, I did not repeat this test with shaping enabled but no link layer adjustments or with the HTB link layer adjustments, so can not really tell, whether RRUL is sensitive enough to show the effects of link layer adjustments or not (my bet is on not as RRUL in my understanding uses large packets while the ATM quantization effects are strongest for small packets). I might try to do this tonight or when I get around to do it…
>>>> 	I would be really curious to see such plots from your setup for comparison.
>>> 
>>> Will try your suggestion for Ubuntu.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> <figure_5.png><figure_6_like_5_noAQM.png>
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> The tone buckets of the phone signal are translated into ATM packets by the DSP in the 2 Wire 2700. I have no idea what this closed source BSD implementation does to the packets before they are sent to CeroWRT.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I am using 3.10.2-1, as I cannot get the latest version to install with sys upgrade.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I was trying 3.10.5-1 
>>>> 
>>>> 	Ah, good, I might try 3.10.6-1 then directly in tftp mode. Does anyone know how much time I have between releasing the reset button and starting the tftp transfer? 
>>>> 
>>> sys upgrade does not work with the latest build. If you have to press the recovery button during restart, I cannot se tftp. Does anyone know of programmatic alternatives?
>> 
>> 	Ah, then is is going to be TFTP I guess. What do you mean by "If you have to press the recovery button during restart, I cannot se tftp"? Does the "reboot-with-reset-button-pressed" not work after a failed sys upgrade?
> 
> I  cannot press the reset button whilst restart in the router. The procedure works, but I cannot do it.

	Ah, good, then I will risk an upgrade. While needing a stool or ladder I should be able to actually press the button during restart...

> I am looking for an alternative. There will be a programmatic approach to enter kernel mode.

Best Regards
	Sebastian


>> 
>> Best Regards
>> 	Sebastian
>> 
>> 
>>>> Best
>>>> 	Sebastian
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> DT has taken to stealth with his releases.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 	So 3.10.6-1 fails with sysupgrade?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> best
>>>>>>> 	Sebastian
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>>>>>>>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>>>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>>>>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>> 
> 

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] AQM and ADSL

[Fred Stratton]

On 14 Aug 2013, at 15:18, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:

> Hi Fred,
> 
> 
> On Aug 14, 2013, at 15:37 , Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On 14 Aug 2013, at 14:31, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Fred,
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Aug 14, 2013, at 14:01 , Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 14 Aug 2013, at 12:42, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Hi Fred,
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Aug 13, 2013, at 21:40 , Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> (apologies for wrecking the list, and introducing email addresses in error)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Begin forwarded message
>>>>>>> On 13 Aug 2013, at 19:53, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> H Fred
>>>>>>>> On Aug 13, 2013, at 17:28 , Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I have been experimenting with the two sets of modified sets of scripts and AQM panels. Thank you for constructing them.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 	Thanks for testing...
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> To mention the string ''for ATM choose' is repeated erroneously in the extended panel.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 	Fixed… I will try to test whether it actually works before sending the next version...
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> The scripts work.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> The link layer giving best results is ethernet.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 	What and how did you measure? Using "use HTB's private mechanism for linklayer and overhead" or "Use tc's stab mechanism for linklayer and overhead"? A little browsing of the kernel source makes me believe that the HTB version is fully busted and will not do anything at all (so I would have imagined adel atm and ethernet to behave the same). I am thinking about how to test whether a link layer adjustment works or not.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Ein Fehler. I had both chosen. They are mutually exclusive options.  2 days of testing lost. Shall restart.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 	I will try to fix the AQM scripts to make these two mutually exclusive. That said, the HTB internal implementation does not seem to work at all, so enabling both should be equivalent to just enabling stab. In my quick and dirty testing (using netsurf-wrapper, which I got working on macosx 10.8) it looks like activating both actually should work. BTW I am looking for an open netsurf server in Europe anybody any ideas?
>>>> 
>>>> I am actually getting better results from htb than td-stab at present.
>>> 
>>> 	Then I will have to test an compare the RRUL performance for stab-linklayeradjustments (loa), htb-lla, no-lla, no-shaping at all, at 50% of link rate and at say 80% of link rate and see which performs best. Alas I need a closer netperf 2.6.0 net server binary than the ones in NY and CA. So far I am failing to find a windows binary I could run on one of the machines in the lab…
>>> 	How do you measure currently? I would love to run the same tests to figure out what is up with the two loa methods.
>> 
>> Netalyzr, for all its deficiencies.
> 
> 	Ah, so you are basically testing the maximum depth of the ge00 uplink fq_codels, which is set at 600 at the moment. You could test this by changing the value in egress() if simple.qos
> 
> $TC qdisc add dev $IFACE parent 1:11 handle 110: $QDISC limit 600 $NOECN `get_quantum 300` `get_flows ${PRIO_RATE}`
> $TC qdisc add dev $IFACE parent 1:12 handle 120: $QDISC limit 600 $NOECN `get_quantum 300` `get_flows ${BE_RATE}`
> $TC qdisc add dev $IFACE parent 1:13 handle 130: $QDISC limit 600 $NOECN `get_quantum 300` `get_flows ${BK_RATE}`
> 
> to 
> 
> $TC qdisc add dev $IFACE parent 1:11 handle 110: $QDISC limit 300 $NOECN `get_quantum 300` `get_flows ${PRIO_RATE}`
> $TC qdisc add dev $IFACE parent 1:12 handle 120: $QDISC limit 300 $NOECN `get_quantum 300` `get_flows ${BE_RATE}`
> $TC qdisc add dev $IFACE parent 1:13 handle 130: $QDISC limit 300 $NOECN `get_quantum 300` `get_flows ${BK_RATE}`
> 
> and the reported buffering will get lower… I assume that netalyzr only complains about the uplink and the downlink is okay? Setting limit higher will make netalyzr more unhappy (up to a certain number over which netalyzr will get happy again). I assume netalyzr simply uses an inelastic UDP load of a fixed bandwidth tries to fill buffers until dropping occurs and deduces the size of the buffer from the amount of data that passed before dropping, if all fits into the buffer nothing needs dropping and hence netalyzr should be happy even though the buffers just got more bloated. 
> 
> 	You could also try http://loki10.mpi-sws.mpg.de/bb/bb.php for that kind of a test which IIRC uses higher bandwidth probes.
> 
> 
> But we have been there in the past, see https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/cerowrt-devel/2012-August/000418.html the critical test is to see whether a concurrent ping or ssh session stays responsive in spite of the netalyzr probe… And interestingly in the old e-mail cited, no AQM defaulted to 500ms uplink delay, the cable modems buffer was simply not enormously oversized to begin with… 
> 
> 	Could you share the netalyzr numbers for no AQM, AQM with HTB and AQM with stab, in any way? And in case you can run this how do the ping statistics (example:
> 
> --- www.heise.de ping statistics ---
> 10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
> round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 5.813/6.120/6.619/0.213 ms
> 
> of a concurrent "ping -c 1000 IPADDRESS.OF.NEAREST>ISPHOST" look, especially the max and stddev values could be interesting…

There will be a delay.

have installed netsurf-wrapper etc, but am having difficulty with the switches.


> 
> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Pinging severs whilst running Netalyzr has no effect.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 	Not being a native english speaker cloud you be more explicit, please. Was the ping RTT affected by the concurrent netalyzr run (especially up- and download testing)? Did you get netsurf-wrapper to work on ubuntu? 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> You did not understand because I explained what I did, and I did the wrong thing.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Not done properly. Will retry. Netsurf-wrapper will not compile. I am going to move to a more recent version of Ubuntu.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 	Interesting, I managed to install it under 64bit Ubuntu 12.04 in a virtual machine, using the packages Toke supplied. I just added http://archive.tohojo.dk/ to "Software Sources" in "Update Manager" than I could use the "Synaptic Package Manager" to install netperf and netperf-wrapper from Toke's repository; so I guess no ned to compile anything. (Under maces however installing netsurf-wrapper was slightly more involved as the recommended way via pip did not work, so I had to download the netperf-wrapper repository from https://github.com/tohojo/netperf-wrapper and the cd into the downloaded directory and issue "sudo python2.7 ./setup.py install" there and I had to symplink python2.7 to python2, but after that it also worked).
>>>>> 	Just as a illustration what to expect, please find attached the RRUL results with stab based AQM und without any AQM; clearly fq_codel improves the ping RTTs a lot, so AQM works. Alas, I did not repeat this test with shaping enabled but no link layer adjustments or with the HTB link layer adjustments, so can not really tell, whether RRUL is sensitive enough to show the effects of link layer adjustments or not (my bet is on not as RRUL in my understanding uses large packets while the ATM quantization effects are strongest for small packets). I might try to do this tonight or when I get around to do it…
>>>>> 	I would be really curious to see such plots from your setup for comparison.
>>>> 
>>>> Will try your suggestion for Ubuntu.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> <figure_5.png><figure_6_like_5_noAQM.png>
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> The tone buckets of the phone signal are translated into ATM packets by the DSP in the 2 Wire 2700. I have no idea what this closed source BSD implementation does to the packets before they are sent to CeroWRT.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I am using 3.10.2-1, as I cannot get the latest version to install with sys upgrade.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I was trying 3.10.5-1 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 	Ah, good, I might try 3.10.6-1 then directly in tftp mode. Does anyone know how much time I have between releasing the reset button and starting the tftp transfer? 
>>>>> 
>>>> sys upgrade does not work with the latest build. If you have to press the recovery button during restart, I cannot se tftp. Does anyone know of programmatic alternatives?
>>> 
>>> 	Ah, then is is going to be TFTP I guess. What do you mean by "If you have to press the recovery button during restart, I cannot se tftp"? Does the "reboot-with-reset-button-pressed" not work after a failed sys upgrade?
>> 
>> I  cannot press the reset button whilst restart in the router. The procedure works, but I cannot do it.
> 
> 	Ah, good, then I will risk an upgrade. While needing a stool or ladder I should be able to actually press the button during restart…

The procedure SHOULD work. I have not tested it.
> 
>> I am looking for an alternative. There will be a programmatic approach to enter kernel mode.
> 
> Best Regards
> 	Sebastian
> 
> 
>>> 
>>> Best Regards
>>> 	Sebastian
>>> 
>>> 
>>>>> Best
>>>>> 	Sebastian
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> DT has taken to stealth with his releases.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 	So 3.10.6-1 fails with sysupgrade?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> best
>>>>>>>> 	Sebastian
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>>>>>>>>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>>>>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>>>>>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>>>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>>> 
>> 
> 

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] AQM and ADSL

[Sebastian Moeller]

Hi Fred,


On Aug 14, 2013, at 16:28 , Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:

> 
> On 14 Aug 2013, at 15:18, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Fred,
>> 
>> 
>> On Aug 14, 2013, at 15:37 , Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> On 14 Aug 2013, at 14:31, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Hi Fred,
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Aug 14, 2013, at 14:01 , Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 14 Aug 2013, at 12:42, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi Fred,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Aug 13, 2013, at 21:40 , Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> (apologies for wrecking the list, and introducing email addresses in error)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Begin forwarded message
>>>>>>>> On 13 Aug 2013, at 19:53, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> H Fred
>>>>>>>>> On Aug 13, 2013, at 17:28 , Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> I have been experimenting with the two sets of modified sets of scripts and AQM panels. Thank you for constructing them.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 	Thanks for testing...
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> To mention the string ''for ATM choose' is repeated erroneously in the extended panel.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 	Fixed… I will try to test whether it actually works before sending the next version...
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> The scripts work.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> The link layer giving best results is ethernet.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 	What and how did you measure? Using "use HTB's private mechanism for linklayer and overhead" or "Use tc's stab mechanism for linklayer and overhead"? A little browsing of the kernel source makes me believe that the HTB version is fully busted and will not do anything at all (so I would have imagined adel atm and ethernet to behave the same). I am thinking about how to test whether a link layer adjustment works or not.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Ein Fehler. I had both chosen. They are mutually exclusive options.  2 days of testing lost. Shall restart.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 	I will try to fix the AQM scripts to make these two mutually exclusive. That said, the HTB internal implementation does not seem to work at all, so enabling both should be equivalent to just enabling stab. In my quick and dirty testing (using netsurf-wrapper, which I got working on macosx 10.8) it looks like activating both actually should work. BTW I am looking for an open netsurf server in Europe anybody any ideas?
>>>>> 
>>>>> I am actually getting better results from htb than td-stab at present.
>>>> 
>>>> 	Then I will have to test an compare the RRUL performance for stab-linklayeradjustments (loa), htb-lla, no-lla, no-shaping at all, at 50% of link rate and at say 80% of link rate and see which performs best. Alas I need a closer netperf 2.6.0 net server binary than the ones in NY and CA. So far I am failing to find a windows binary I could run on one of the machines in the lab…
>>>> 	How do you measure currently? I would love to run the same tests to figure out what is up with the two loa methods.
>>> 
>>> Netalyzr, for all its deficiencies.
>> 
>> 	Ah, so you are basically testing the maximum depth of the ge00 uplink fq_codels, which is set at 600 at the moment. You could test this by changing the value in egress() if simple.qos
>> 
>> $TC qdisc add dev $IFACE parent 1:11 handle 110: $QDISC limit 600 $NOECN `get_quantum 300` `get_flows ${PRIO_RATE}`
>> $TC qdisc add dev $IFACE parent 1:12 handle 120: $QDISC limit 600 $NOECN `get_quantum 300` `get_flows ${BE_RATE}`
>> $TC qdisc add dev $IFACE parent 1:13 handle 130: $QDISC limit 600 $NOECN `get_quantum 300` `get_flows ${BK_RATE}`
>> 
>> to 
>> 
>> $TC qdisc add dev $IFACE parent 1:11 handle 110: $QDISC limit 300 $NOECN `get_quantum 300` `get_flows ${PRIO_RATE}`
>> $TC qdisc add dev $IFACE parent 1:12 handle 120: $QDISC limit 300 $NOECN `get_quantum 300` `get_flows ${BE_RATE}`
>> $TC qdisc add dev $IFACE parent 1:13 handle 130: $QDISC limit 300 $NOECN `get_quantum 300` `get_flows ${BK_RATE}`
>> 
>> and the reported buffering will get lower… I assume that netalyzr only complains about the uplink and the downlink is okay? Setting limit higher will make netalyzr more unhappy (up to a certain number over which netalyzr will get happy again). I assume netalyzr simply uses an inelastic UDP load of a fixed bandwidth tries to fill buffers until dropping occurs and deduces the size of the buffer from the amount of data that passed before dropping, if all fits into the buffer nothing needs dropping and hence netalyzr should be happy even though the buffers just got more bloated. 
>> 
>> 	You could also try http://loki10.mpi-sws.mpg.de/bb/bb.php for that kind of a test which IIRC uses higher bandwidth probes.
>> 
>> 
>> But we have been there in the past, see https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/cerowrt-devel/2012-August/000418.html the critical test is to see whether a concurrent ping or ssh session stays responsive in spite of the netalyzr probe… And interestingly in the old e-mail cited, no AQM defaulted to 500ms uplink delay, the cable modems buffer was simply not enormously oversized to begin with… 
>> 
>> 	Could you share the netalyzr numbers for no AQM, AQM with HTB and AQM with stab, in any way? And in case you can run this how do the ping statistics (example:
>> 
>> --- www.heise.de ping statistics ---
>> 10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
>> round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 5.813/6.120/6.619/0.213 ms
>> 
>> of a concurrent "ping -c 1000 IPADDRESS.OF.NEAREST>ISPHOST" look, especially the max and stddev values could be interesting…
> 
> There will be a delay.

	I do not think that these measurements will be too revealing anyways, netalyzr is a good test for simple pfifo or pfifo_fast discs, but not too interesting for fq_codel. In case you stick to using netalyzr concurrent ping data might be nice, but better switch to a different latency probe.


> 
> have installed netsurf-wrapper etc, but am having difficulty with the switches.


	Ah, so I so far simply used 
./netperf-wrapper -l 60 -H snapon.lab.bufferbloat.net rrul -p all_scaled

to at least get pretty pictures for my quick and dirty testing. The -l NN controls the duration of the test, the -H the host, I found that both snapon.lab.bufferbloat.net and icei.org seem to be open netsurf servers (as Dave announced earlier this year), I do not know whether these are supposed to be used by everyone or not (and it would be nice to have a net server closer in Europe anyways). 

I hope this gets you going…

Best
	Sebastian


> 
> 
>> 
>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Pinging severs whilst running Netalyzr has no effect.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 	Not being a native english speaker cloud you be more explicit, please. Was the ping RTT affected by the concurrent netalyzr run (especially up- and download testing)? Did you get netsurf-wrapper to work on ubuntu? 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> You did not understand because I explained what I did, and I did the wrong thing.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Not done properly. Will retry. Netsurf-wrapper will not compile. I am going to move to a more recent version of Ubuntu.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 	Interesting, I managed to install it under 64bit Ubuntu 12.04 in a virtual machine, using the packages Toke supplied. I just added http://archive.tohojo.dk/ to "Software Sources" in "Update Manager" than I could use the "Synaptic Package Manager" to install netperf and netperf-wrapper from Toke's repository; so I guess no ned to compile anything. (Under maces however installing netsurf-wrapper was slightly more involved as the recommended way via pip did not work, so I had to download the netperf-wrapper repository from https://github.com/tohojo/netperf-wrapper and the cd into the downloaded directory and issue "sudo python2.7 ./setup.py install" there and I had to symplink python2.7 to python2, but after that it also worked).
>>>>>> 	Just as a illustration what to expect, please find attached the RRUL results with stab based AQM und without any AQM; clearly fq_codel improves the ping RTTs a lot, so AQM works. Alas, I did not repeat this test with shaping enabled but no link layer adjustments or with the HTB link layer adjustments, so can not really tell, whether RRUL is sensitive enough to show the effects of link layer adjustments or not (my bet is on not as RRUL in my understanding uses large packets while the ATM quantization effects are strongest for small packets). I might try to do this tonight or when I get around to do it…
>>>>>> 	I would be really curious to see such plots from your setup for comparison.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Will try your suggestion for Ubuntu.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> <figure_5.png><figure_6_like_5_noAQM.png>
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> The tone buckets of the phone signal are translated into ATM packets by the DSP in the 2 Wire 2700. I have no idea what this closed source BSD implementation does to the packets before they are sent to CeroWRT.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> I am using 3.10.2-1, as I cannot get the latest version to install with sys upgrade.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I was trying 3.10.5-1 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 	Ah, good, I might try 3.10.6-1 then directly in tftp mode. Does anyone know how much time I have between releasing the reset button and starting the tftp transfer? 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> sys upgrade does not work with the latest build. If you have to press the recovery button during restart, I cannot se tftp. Does anyone know of programmatic alternatives?
>>>> 
>>>> 	Ah, then is is going to be TFTP I guess. What do you mean by "If you have to press the recovery button during restart, I cannot se tftp"? Does the "reboot-with-reset-button-pressed" not work after a failed sys upgrade?
>>> 
>>> I  cannot press the reset button whilst restart in the router. The procedure works, but I cannot do it.
>> 
>> 	Ah, good, then I will risk an upgrade. While needing a stool or ladder I should be able to actually press the button during restart…
> 
> The procedure SHOULD work. I have not tested it.
>> 
>>> I am looking for an alternative. There will be a programmatic approach to enter kernel mode.
>> 
>> Best Regards
>> 	Sebastian
>> 
>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Best Regards
>>>> 	Sebastian
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>> Best
>>>>>> 	Sebastian
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> DT has taken to stealth with his releases.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 	So 3.10.6-1 fails with sysupgrade?
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> best
>>>>>>>>> 	Sebastian
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>>>>>>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>>>>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] AQM and ADSL

[Fred Stratton]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 12106 bytes --]


On 14 Aug 2013, at 16:09, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:

> Hi Fred,
> 
> 
> On Aug 14, 2013, at 16:28 , Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On 14 Aug 2013, at 15:18, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Fred,
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Aug 14, 2013, at 15:37 , Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 14 Aug 2013, at 14:31, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Hi Fred,
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Aug 14, 2013, at 14:01 , Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 14 Aug 2013, at 12:42, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi Fred,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Aug 13, 2013, at 21:40 , Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> (apologies for wrecking the list, and introducing email addresses in error)
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Begin forwarded message
>>>>>>>>> On 13 Aug 2013, at 19:53, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> H Fred
>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 13, 2013, at 17:28 , Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> I have been experimenting with the two sets of modified sets of scripts and AQM panels. Thank you for constructing them.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 	Thanks for testing...
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> To mention the string ''for ATM choose' is repeated erroneously in the extended panel.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 	Fixed… I will try to test whether it actually works before sending the next version...
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> The scripts work.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> The link layer giving best results is ethernet.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 	What and how did you measure? Using "use HTB's private mechanism for linklayer and overhead" or "Use tc's stab mechanism for linklayer and overhead"? A little browsing of the kernel source makes me believe that the HTB version is fully busted and will not do anything at all (so I would have imagined adel atm and ethernet to behave the same). I am thinking about how to test whether a link layer adjustment works or not.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Ein Fehler. I had both chosen. They are mutually exclusive options.  2 days of testing lost. Shall restart.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 	I will try to fix the AQM scripts to make these two mutually exclusive. That said, the HTB internal implementation does not seem to work at all, so enabling both should be equivalent to just enabling stab. In my quick and dirty testing (using netsurf-wrapper, which I got working on macosx 10.8) it looks like activating both actually should work. BTW I am looking for an open netsurf server in Europe anybody any ideas?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I am actually getting better results from htb than td-stab at present.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 	Then I will have to test an compare the RRUL performance for stab-linklayeradjustments (loa), htb-lla, no-lla, no-shaping at all, at 50% of link rate and at say 80% of link rate and see which performs best. Alas I need a closer netperf 2.6.0 net server binary than the ones in NY and CA. So far I am failing to find a windows binary I could run on one of the machines in the lab…
>>>>> 	How do you measure currently? I would love to run the same tests to figure out what is up with the two loa methods.
>>>> 
>>>> Netalyzr, for all its deficiencies.
>>> 
>>> 	Ah, so you are basically testing the maximum depth of the ge00 uplink fq_codels, which is set at 600 at the moment. You could test this by changing the value in egress() if simple.qos
>>> 
>>> $TC qdisc add dev $IFACE parent 1:11 handle 110: $QDISC limit 600 $NOECN `get_quantum 300` `get_flows ${PRIO_RATE}`
>>> $TC qdisc add dev $IFACE parent 1:12 handle 120: $QDISC limit 600 $NOECN `get_quantum 300` `get_flows ${BE_RATE}`
>>> $TC qdisc add dev $IFACE parent 1:13 handle 130: $QDISC limit 600 $NOECN `get_quantum 300` `get_flows ${BK_RATE}`
>>> 
>>> to 
>>> 
>>> $TC qdisc add dev $IFACE parent 1:11 handle 110: $QDISC limit 300 $NOECN `get_quantum 300` `get_flows ${PRIO_RATE}`
>>> $TC qdisc add dev $IFACE parent 1:12 handle 120: $QDISC limit 300 $NOECN `get_quantum 300` `get_flows ${BE_RATE}`
>>> $TC qdisc add dev $IFACE parent 1:13 handle 130: $QDISC limit 300 $NOECN `get_quantum 300` `get_flows ${BK_RATE}`
>>> 
>>> and the reported buffering will get lower… I assume that netalyzr only complains about the uplink and the downlink is okay? Setting limit higher will make netalyzr more unhappy (up to a certain number over which netalyzr will get happy again). I assume netalyzr simply uses an inelastic UDP load of a fixed bandwidth tries to fill buffers until dropping occurs and deduces the size of the buffer from the amount of data that passed before dropping, if all fits into the buffer nothing needs dropping and hence netalyzr should be happy even though the buffers just got more bloated. 
>>> 
>>> 	You could also try http://loki10.mpi-sws.mpg.de/bb/bb.php for that kind of a test which IIRC uses higher bandwidth probes.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> But we have been there in the past, see https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/cerowrt-devel/2012-August/000418.html the critical test is to see whether a concurrent ping or ssh session stays responsive in spite of the netalyzr probe… And interestingly in the old e-mail cited, no AQM defaulted to 500ms uplink delay, the cable modems buffer was simply not enormously oversized to begin with… 
>>> 
>>> 	Could you share the netalyzr numbers for no AQM, AQM with HTB and AQM with stab, in any way? And in case you can run this how do the ping statistics (example:
>>> 
>>> --- www.heise.de ping statistics ---
>>> 10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
>>> round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 5.813/6.120/6.619/0.213 ms
>>> 
>>> of a concurrent "ping -c 1000 IPADDRESS.OF.NEAREST>ISPHOST" look, especially the max and stddev values could be interesting…
>> 
>> There will be a delay.
> 
> 	I do not think that these measurements will be too revealing anyways, netalyzr is a good test for simple pfifo or pfifo_fast discs, but not too interesting for fq_codel. In case you stick to using netalyzr concurrent ping data might be nice, but better switch to a different latency probe.
> 
> 
>> 
>> have installed netsurf-wrapper etc, but am having difficulty with the switches.
> 
> 
> 	Ah, so I so far simply used 
> ./netperf-wrapper -l 60 -H snapon.lab.bufferbloat.net rrul -p all_scaled
> 
> to at least get pretty pictures for my quick and dirty testing. The -l NN controls the duration of the test, the -H the host, I found that both snapon.lab.bufferbloat.net and icei.org seem to be open netsurf servers (as Dave announced earlier this year), I do not know whether these are supposed to be used by everyone or not (and it would be nice to have a net server closer in Europe anyways). 
> 
> I hope this gets you going…

Thank you. The snapon server errorred 'no config file found'.

fq_codel, simplest.qos, htb, 8000,700



> 
> Best
> 	Sebastian
> 
> 
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Pinging severs whilst running Netalyzr has no effect.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 	Not being a native english speaker cloud you be more explicit, please. Was the ping RTT affected by the concurrent netalyzr run (especially up- and download testing)? Did you get netsurf-wrapper to work on ubuntu? 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> You did not understand because I explained what I did, and I did the wrong thing.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Not done properly. Will retry. Netsurf-wrapper will not compile. I am going to move to a more recent version of Ubuntu.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 	Interesting, I managed to install it under 64bit Ubuntu 12.04 in a virtual machine, using the packages Toke supplied. I just added http://archive.tohojo.dk/ to "Software Sources" in "Update Manager" than I could use the "Synaptic Package Manager" to install netperf and netperf-wrapper from Toke's repository; so I guess no ned to compile anything. (Under maces however installing netsurf-wrapper was slightly more involved as the recommended way via pip did not work, so I had to download the netperf-wrapper repository from https://github.com/tohojo/netperf-wrapper and the cd into the downloaded directory and issue "sudo python2.7 ./setup.py install" there and I had to symplink python2.7 to python2, but after that it also worked).
>>>>>>> 	Just as a illustration what to expect, please find attached the RRUL results with stab based AQM und without any AQM; clearly fq_codel improves the ping RTTs a lot, so AQM works. Alas, I did not repeat this test with shaping enabled but no link layer adjustments or with the HTB link layer adjustments, so can not really tell, whether RRUL is sensitive enough to show the effects of link layer adjustments or not (my bet is on not as RRUL in my understanding uses large packets while the ATM quantization effects are strongest for small packets). I might try to do this tonight or when I get around to do it…
>>>>>>> 	I would be really curious to see such plots from your setup for comparison.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Will try your suggestion for Ubuntu.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> <figure_5.png><figure_6_like_5_noAQM.png>
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> The tone buckets of the phone signal are translated into ATM packets by the DSP in the 2 Wire 2700. I have no idea what this closed source BSD implementation does to the packets before they are sent to CeroWRT.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> I am using 3.10.2-1, as I cannot get the latest version to install with sys upgrade.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I was trying 3.10.5-1 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 	Ah, good, I might try 3.10.6-1 then directly in tftp mode. Does anyone know how much time I have between releasing the reset button and starting the tftp transfer? 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> sys upgrade does not work with the latest build. If you have to press the recovery button during restart, I cannot se tftp. Does anyone know of programmatic alternatives?
>>>>> 
>>>>> 	Ah, then is is going to be TFTP I guess. What do you mean by "If you have to press the recovery button during restart, I cannot se tftp"? Does the "reboot-with-reset-button-pressed" not work after a failed sys upgrade?
>>>> 
>>>> I  cannot press the reset button whilst restart in the router. The procedure works, but I cannot do it.
>>> 
>>> 	Ah, good, then I will risk an upgrade. While needing a stool or ladder I should be able to actually press the button during restart…
>> 
>> The procedure SHOULD work. I have not tested it.
>>> 
>>>> I am looking for an alternative. There will be a programmatic approach to enter kernel mode.
>>> 
>>> Best Regards
>>> 	Sebastian
>>> 
>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Best Regards
>>>>> 	Sebastian
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Best
>>>>>>> 	Sebastian
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> DT has taken to stealth with his releases.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 	So 3.10.6-1 fails with sysupgrade?
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> best
>>>>>>>>>> 	Sebastian
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>>>>>>>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>>>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>>>>>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
> 


[-- Attachment #2.1: Type: text/html, Size: 15654 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2.2: fq_simplest_htb_8000_700a.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 241826 bytes --]

[Cerowrt-devel] AQM and ADSL

[Fred Stratton]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2177 bytes --]


(sent to incorrect email address, again)
Begin forwarded message:

> From: Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>
> Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] AQM and ADSL
> Date: 13 August 2013 19:53:45 BST
> To: Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc>
> Cc: "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" <cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net>
> 
> H Fred
> On Aug 13, 2013, at 17:28 , Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:
> 
>> I have been experimenting with the two sets of modified sets of scripts and AQM panels. Thank you for constructing them.
> 
> 	Thanks for testing...
> 
>> 
>> To mention the string ''for ATM choose' is repeated erroneously in the extended panel.
> 
> 	Fixed… I will try to test whether it actually works before sending the next version...
> 
>> 
>> The scripts work.
>> 
>> The link layer giving best results is ethernet.
> 
> 	What and how did you measure? Using "use HTB's private mechanism for linklayer and overhead" or "Use tc's stab mechanism for linklayer and overhead"? A little browsing of the kernel source makes me believe that the HTB version is fully busted and will not do anything at all (so I would have imagined adel atm and ethernet to behave the same). I am thinking about how to test whether a link layer adjustment works or not.
> 
> 
>> Pinging severs whilst running Netalyzr has no effect.
> 
> 	Not being a native english speaker cloud you be more explicit, please. Was the ping RTT affected by the concurrent netalyzr run (especially up- and download testing)? Did you get netsurf-wrapper to work on ubuntu?
> 
> 
>> 
>> The tone buckets of the phone signal are translated into ATM packets by the DSP in the 2 Wire 2700. I have no idea what this closed source BSD implementation does to the packets before they are sent to CeroWRT.
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> I am using 3.10.2-1, as I cannot get the latest version to install with sys upgrade.
> 
> 	So 3.10.6-1 fails with sysupgrade?
> 
> 
> best
> 	Sebastian
> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
> 


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4691 bytes --]

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] AQM and ADSL

[Sebastian Moeller]

H Fred
On Aug 13, 2013, at 17:28 , Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:

> I have been experimenting with the two sets of modified sets of scripts and AQM panels. Thank you for constructing them.

	Thanks for testing...

> 
> To mention the string ''for ATM choose' is repeated erroneously in the extended panel.

	Fixed… I will try to test whether it actually works before sending the next version...

> 
> The scripts work.
> 
> The link layer giving best results is ethernet.

	What and how did you measure? Using "use HTB's private mechanism for linklayer and overhead" or "Use tc's stab mechanism for linklayer and overhead"? A little browsing of the kernel source makes me believe that the HTB version is fully busted and will not do anything at all (so I would have imagined adel atm and ethernet to behave the same). I am thinking about how to test whether a link layer adjustment works or not.


> Pinging severs whilst running Netalyzr has no effect.

	Not being a native english speaker cloud you be more explicit, please. Was the ping RTT affected by the concurrent netalyzr run (especially up- and download testing)? Did you get netsurf-wrapper to work on ubuntu?


> 
> The tone buckets of the phone signal are translated into ATM packets by the DSP in the 2 Wire 2700. I have no idea what this closed source BSD implementation does to the packets before they are sent to CeroWRT.



> 
> I am using 3.10.2-1, as I cannot get the latest version to install with sys upgrade.

	So 3.10.6-1 fails with sysupgrade?


best
	Sebastian

> 
> _______________________________________________
> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel

[Cerowrt-devel] AQM and ADSL

[Fred Stratton]

I have been experimenting with the two sets of modified sets of scripts and AQM panels. Thank you for constructing them.

To mention the string ''for ATM choose' is repeated erroneously in the extended panel.

The scripts work.

The link layer giving best results is ethernet. Pinging severs whilst running Netalyzr has no effect.

The tone buckets of the phone signal are translated into ATM packets by the DSP in the 2 Wire 2700. I have no idea what this closed source BSD implementation does to the packets before they are sent to CeroWRT.

I am using 3.10.2-1, as I cannot get the latest version to install with sysupgrade.