Re: [Cerowrt-devel] Invisibility of bufferbloat and its remedies

[Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>]

Well,

On June 19, 2018 10:34:07 PM GMT+02:00, valdis.kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
>On Mon, 18 Jun 2018 18:46:18 -0700, Dave Taht said:
>
>> One of cake's "minor" features is the *perfect* defeat of the htb
>> based shaper in cable modems. If you know the set-rate on the modem,
>> you just set it to the same thing and get vastly superior performance
>to
>> docsis 3.1, pie, or the sqm-scripts.
>
>Do we have a good cookbook on how to determine the set-rate?

With cable <DOCSIS 3.1 one can Snoop the management frames that will also carry the bandwidth definitions. Or with a compromised cable modem one could dump the DOCSIS config file that also contains that information. Or ask the ISP. Short of any of that one could run a umber of speedtests over a 24 hour period and simply extrapolate from the measured goodput to the required 'gross' DOCSIS shaper rate:

Measured TCP/ipv4 goodput * ((1518)/(1500-20-20)) = lower bound gross bandwidth estimate

DOCSIS employs a shaper to limit user's exceeding the contracted rates, that per DOCSIS standard assumes 1518 bytes of accountable raw frame size. Tangent that 1518 obviously is a 'lie' in that it does not include all per packet overhead in use on a DOCSIS carrier, but from an end-user perspective that difference is immaterial...

I realize that you probably wanted something simpler and more accurate, sorry to disappoint.

Best Regards
        Sebastian



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

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.