From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 7947721F33C; Wed, 8 Oct 2014 20:23:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2014 20:23:09 -0700 From: Dave Taht To: Stephan =?iso-8859-1?Q?G=FCnther?= Message-ID: <20141009032309.GB19113@lists.bufferbloat.net> References: <20141002014914.GA12656@lists.bufferbloat.net> <54359A46.8000107@iki.fi> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Cc: OpenWrt Development List , cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] [OpenWrt-Devel] [RFC PATCH] packages: Smart Queue Management for AQM Packet Scheduling and Qos from CeroWrt 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: Thu, 09 Oct 2014 03:23:09 -0000 On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 01:01:48AM +0200, Stephan Günther wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 10:10 PM, Hannu Nyman wrote: > > Dave Taht wrote on Thu Oct 2 03:49:15 CEST 2014: > >> So I don't know where to go. Certainly I'd like to see the battle hardened > >> sqm scripts (which are more flexible than the C code above) get more widely > >> used and in BB. > > > > SQM seems to work ok with the current Chaos Calmer trunk. > > Works for mee too, and performs much better than the old luci-app-qos. > I would love to see this as part of OpenWrt. OK. I don't see it feasible to retire qos-scripts as that has less dependencies than sqm does - sqm needs "ip" and tc to function. But I'd certainly like to see it available in the main openwrt repo by default. And: I'd like the next version to do what sqm does, in pure c, at line rate OR software rate limited, faster, better, smaller... > I did some RRUL test using netperf-wrapper on my ADSL 15/1Mbps PPPoE > link and it looks good in the graphs. I also have an 6in4 tunnel I always love it when people post their results and the .json.gz files for the various netperf-wrapper tests somewhere. It has been good to build an ever increasing database of valid tests and valid setups, given that things like speedtest.net are so lame. Examples: http://burntchrome.blogspot.com/2014_05_01_archive.html http://snapon.lab.bufferbloat.net/~cero2/jimreisert/results.html While I'm at it there were a couple manefestos along the way. This explains exactly where and why wondershaper was flawed: http://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/cerowrt/wiki/Wondershaper_Must_Die And this talks to the need for fq + aqm on *everything* http://gettys.wordpress.com/2013/07/10/low-latency-requires-smart-queuing-traditional-aqm-is-not-enough/ (I was unhappy qos-scripts just disabled ecn entirely. ECN is looking safely deployable in a fq'd system IMHO). Last manefesto above does not go into the (slight) remaining need for a few levels of classification, one reason is here: http://perso.telecom-paristech.fr/~drossi/paper/rossi13tma-b.pdf It is my hope that by explaining the "why" of sqm we could come up with something better before making it available at larger scale. > inside PPPoE and IIRC fq_codel should detect these ipv6 flows. RRUL fq_codel dissects the headers for ipip, ipv6, gre and another protocol I forget, correctly, and fq's them correctly. However my head explodes as to what happens or which device should be used when that is further encapsulated. > looks good at IPv6. Had this running at home for some days now, with > moderate traffic and no issues so far. Well loading it up is the only way to tell if you're winning. > But I was wondering which interface to select luci-app-sqm, as no > tunnel intefaces are shown here. So i used the ethernet interface > instead of the PPPoE link. Is this fine? Minutes ago, I did a quick > test and applied SQM to the PPPoE link by fixing luci-base to return > also the virtual interfaces in net:get_interfaces(). But i didn't > notice any difference or my test was too sloppy. Well, sebastian just made a few SQM changes also in the ceropackages repo and PPPoe over atm makes my head hurt. See cerowrt-devel for more list. I'm a huge believer in measurements, and netperf-wrapper has been the closest thing the Internet has ever had to one that accurately measures latency under load. Recently it was proven to scale all the way to 40GigE. Things like speedtest are increasingly inaccurate above 20mbits, and doesn't measure induced latency at all... and netalyzer, being written in java, doesn't get past 20mbits either. > > -- > Stephan > _______________________________________________ > openwrt-devel mailing list > openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org > https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel