From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.19]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mout.gmx.net", Issuer "TeleSec ServerPass DE-1" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 39FA621F18E for ; Mon, 24 Feb 2014 14:02:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from hms-beagle-2.home.lan ([217.86.112.208]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MUCTO-1WhsBL0LKs-00R2fF for ; Mon, 24 Feb 2014 23:02:37 +0100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\)) From: Sebastian Moeller In-Reply-To: <530B6429.9040307@imap.cc> Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 23:02:35 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <400D7C7F-5B6D-43D9-8F90-3A3B03670AB8@gmx.de> References: <4E5BC321-2054-4364-BECC-DF34E0D20380@gmail.com> <530B6429.9040307@imap.cc> To: Fred Stratton X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510) X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:C+8E+UtmNfIS14ZVDhxDxX8zFl0DC/BHigZsFmz9/+TlAm3tH8Q e0Q1TKp6NbOESZq8JvTaCtShk6pcmIRUGV7rCRfWEgJykxPzBG+5CZz+GtCyqIETeH7RcHU jMP8edoXy8FOzfbQhsEPP8JWhuBjSNj3Wi35WIgTDrIT+D4nVMM/WIeNlQrZg4puGLV/XWn tEb0DWd/V3EA/Z/X4faDg== Cc: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] Equivocal results with using 3.10.28-14 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: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 22:02:55 -0000 Hi Fred, On Feb 24, 2014, at 16:24 , Fred Stratton wrote: > How are you measuring the link speed? >=20 > With SQM enabled, I have speedtest.net results far below the values at = which the gateway syncs. >=20 > IF the gateway syncs at 12000/1000, the speedtest figures are 9500/850 >=20 > The performance I obtain with streaming video is very good, tweaking = the extra settings in SQM on 3.10.28-16 >=20 > I am sure you are aware that you will never achieve the values quoted = by the ISP. But the current rate given by the modem is a pretty true = measurement of the bandwidth between the modem and the DSLAM, = independent on the marketing numbers of the ISP ;) > How long is your line? Downstream attenuation is a proxy for this. Once the sync is working this does not matter any more, having = seen Rich's line stats, he has a very clean ADSL with SNRM of 22 and 11 = and almost no errors (not even many FECs). Best Regards Sebastian > Are you using ADSL2+, or some other protocol? Does the device even = tell you? >=20 > On 24/02/14 14:36, Rich Brown wrote: >> CeroWrt 3.10.28-14 is doing a good job of keeping latency low. But... = it has two other effects: >>=20 >> - I don't get the full "7 mbps down, 768 kbps up" as touted by my DSL = provider (Fairpoint). In fact, CeroWrt struggles to get above 6.0/0.6 = mbps. >>=20 >> - When I adjust the SQM parameters to get close to those numbers, I = get increasing levels of packet loss (5-8%) during a concurrent ping = test. >>=20 >> So my question to the group is whether this behavior makes sense: = that we can have low latency while losing ~10% of the link capacity, or = that getting close to the link capacity should induce large packet = loss... >>=20 >> Experimental setup: >>=20 >> I'm using a Comtrend 583-U DSL modem, that has a sync rate of 7616 = kbps down, 864 kbps up. Theoretically, I should be able to tell SQM to = use numbers a bit lower than those values, with an ATM plus header = overhead with default settings. >>=20 >> I have posted the results of my netperf-wrapper trials at = http://richb-hanover.com - There are a number of RRUL charts, taken with = different link rates configured, and with different link layers. >>=20 >> I welcome people's thoughts for other tests/adjustments/etc. >>=20 >> Rich Brown >> Hanover, NH USA >>=20 >> PS I did try the 3.10.28-16, but ran into troubles with wifi and = ethernet connectivity. I must have screwed up my local configuration - I = was doing it quickly - so I rolled back to 3.10.28.14. >> _______________________________________________ >> Cerowrt-devel mailing list >> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Cerowrt-devel mailing list > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel