From: Rich Brown <richb.hanover@gmail.com>
To: cerowrt-devel <cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: [Cerowrt-devel] Equivocal results with using 3.10.28-14
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 09:36:41 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E5BC321-2054-4364-BECC-DF34E0D20380@gmail.com> (raw)
CeroWrt 3.10.28-14 is doing a good job of keeping latency low. But... it has two other effects:
- 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.
- 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.
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...
Experimental setup:
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.
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.
I welcome people's thoughts for other tests/adjustments/etc.
Rich Brown
Hanover, NH USA
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.
next reply other threads:[~2014-02-24 14:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-02-24 14:36 Rich Brown [this message]
2014-02-24 14:56 ` Aaron Wood
2014-02-25 13:09 ` Rich Brown
2014-02-25 13:37 ` Sebastian Moeller
2014-02-25 15:54 ` Dave Taht
2014-02-25 16:29 ` Sebastian Moeller
2014-02-24 15:24 ` Fred Stratton
2014-02-24 22:02 ` Sebastian Moeller
2014-02-24 15:51 ` Dave Taht
2014-02-24 16:14 ` Dave Taht
2014-02-24 16:38 ` Aaron Wood
2014-02-24 16:47 ` Dave Taht
2014-02-24 21:54 ` Sebastian Moeller
2014-02-24 22:40 ` Sebastian Moeller
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://lists.bufferbloat.net/postorius/lists/cerowrt-devel.lists.bufferbloat.net/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4E5BC321-2054-4364-BECC-DF34E0D20380@gmail.com \
--to=richb.hanover@gmail.com \
--cc=cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox