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-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mout.gmx.net", Issuer "TeleSec ServerPass DE-1" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 12DDB21FF5E for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2015 13:34:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hms-beagle-7.home.lan ([217.237.70.193]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx001) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MEXHd-1ZBi8D0rxR-00Fo82; Fri, 10 Jul 2015 22:34:36 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) From: Sebastian Moeller In-Reply-To: <55A029E8.4030805@imap.cc> Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2015 22:34:34 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <8EB05481-3899-414F-B8CC-18A77E7D4520@gmx.de> References: <559FA8D4.2030305@imap.cc> <559FDC38.9010400@imap.cc> <559FE294.60801@gmail.com> <55A00E06.3000000@imap.cc> <55A01E2A.4050508@imap.cc> <55A020CE.2060700@imap.cc> <55A025F7.3000602@imap.cc> <60C15149-4219-4AED-A7AB-DEB90CAC8603@gmx.de> <55A029E8.4030805@imap.cc> To: Fred Stratton X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:ZXuZxR8GtcaU3J9tJWt0N1E1mwW/QDtigNyFR8kuJct666oP7kH Zuxba2KQCuSpSStiagzntFVcVQ+5AEr6+ghNISDhNnV6n15DKEOhrkewPUwM3YFrrucDlR4 tjEH29jfadcyRwLGYsuz83ilR62meLt//Ztx5Z1Ex5O2haFRHTZAnIf0NLn31kH88fQDro0 Pj9TTw6DQr/NyxG18ruzA== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:IsVJVhqVbq8=:jNkVN2wbQh7U82Ehl+2gPM 9mv3NgG1jQJ9YINaJ0A9/1XVXn/Snj1AL297+2weKnzoCgjuwWmawb8mQFa5IYbGqYbs44sAo UmbWY2uw5G3H5AKd9KLRs1Y0MdLEsW8qLxpbFHkeQjv2Xwwl9hMxd32YSqZ+e5y1IZy2PVTrs AVP0P3RRektJxjgMYmA8c3KZENVkObcQp9e5zHtosX8t0fRABDK1qRAudfS9HzXIR2Tsp1rop eJ2WEm1FPLMlGMatlQp7Yh1tnXuryIumpQPMfoCxY0NgbkcAPr1vgp3J92MSKWEYatX93UlW1 Aj/TFtTauDkEMA5EsTguWyF3FzyI0eN0zBqzBA8NX4pl/LjOqITAebdGUhFjL84VPk5X2ouV9 rBMVECSr4XsJGCl90niIwkMWGfcOakUNh/GZq+GiDiWE6Vk2J1CfeDvt2fhGWIgcC2LyRhc79 MR2X+JJuVBHx/z/cABKhdNBVvi0rrrZ9D+y0EmXlwxGrF7J7fa3/gq2WHTVW0k5E3PYiDPhYj MTjrBFoLO7IKZD7MXGV1u9FLirMh57vRbSUYpoJKaznne/kG2WT1SwT2kDHcgRrA0VUpKKvgb JX4OSjjHZiWWok4Cc7xrkf7veclS0B/XmHzQ/a/afrx9tTI6Z4+5aeJtfhIvfs1erXfZMODYD ycNz+Y49P0KHpVY7XCl9/qQUCjWXtxbhN1emlY7c80RDPifsuC7RltodskecBqrfwdWQ= Cc: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] Correct syntax for cake commands and atm issues. 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: Fri, 10 Jul 2015 20:35:07 -0000 Hi Fred, and now the values look decent, the latency under load increase is = bounded to 38ms worst case, not bad at all for am ADSL line. Best Regards Sebastian On Jul 10, 2015, at 22:24 , Fred Stratton wrote: > sh betterspeedtest.sh -4 -H netperf-eu.bufferbloat.ne > t -t 150 -p netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net -n 4 ; sh netperfrunner.sh -4 = -H netperf- > eu.bufferbloat.net -t 150 -p netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net -n 4 > 2015-07-10 21:15:19 Testing against netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net (ipv4) = with 4 simultaneous sessions while pinging netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net = (150 seconds in each direction) > = ..........................................................................= ..........................................................................= .. > Download: 6.8 Mbps > Latency: (in msec, 151 pings, 0.00% packet loss) > Min: 69.125 > 10pct: 72.299 > Median: 75.077 > Avg: 75.613 > 90pct: 79.014 > Max: 89.825 > = ..........................................................................= ..........................................................................= ... > Upload: 0.72 Mbps > Latency: (in msec, 152 pings, 0.00% packet loss) > Min: 68.691 > 10pct: 72.506 > Median: 79.447 > Avg: 79.654 > 90pct: 86.369 > Max: 95.037 > 2015-07-10 21:20:21 Testing netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net (ipv4) with 4 = streams down and up while pinging netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net. Takes = about 150 seconds. > Download: 5.92 Mbps > Upload: 0.46 Mbps > Latency: (in msec, 152 pings, 0.00% packet loss) > Min: 71.877 > 10pct: 76.197 > Median: 85.051 > Avg: 84.838 > 90pct: 92.105 > Max: 109.600 >=20 >=20 > On 10/07/15 21:12, Sebastian Moeller wrote: >> Hi Fred, >>=20 >> On Jul 10, 2015, at 22:07 , Fred Stratton = wrote: >>=20 >>> replaced /usr/lib/sqm as ordered >> Thanks. >>=20 >>> cat /etc/config/sqm >>>=20 >>> config queue 'eth1' >>> option qdisc_advanced '0' >>> option enabled '1' >>> option interface 'pppoe-wan' >>> option upload '850' >>> option qdisc 'cake' >>> option linklayer 'atm' >>> option overhead '40' >>> option download '8500' >>> option script 'simple.qos' >>> option linklayer_advanced '1' >>> option tcMTU '2047' >>> option tcTSIZE '128' >>> option tcMPU '0' >>> option linklayer_adaptation_mechanism =91cake' >> Looks reasonable. >>=20 >>> root@OpenWrt:~# tc -s qdisc show >>> qdisc fq_codel 0: dev eth0 root refcnt 2 limit 1024p flows 1024 = quantum 300 target 5.0ms interval 100.0ms ecn >>> Sent 5904206 bytes 10771 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 1) >>> backlog 0b 0p requeues 1 >>> maxpacket 256 drop_overlimit 0 new_flow_count 0 ecn_mark 0 >>> new_flows_len 0 old_flows_len 0 >>> qdisc fq_codel 0: dev eth1 root refcnt 2 limit 1024p flows 1024 = quantum 300 target 5.0ms interval 100.0ms ecn >>> Sent 903154 bytes 7941 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 2) >>> backlog 0b 0p requeues 2 >>> maxpacket 1322 drop_overlimit 0 new_flow_count 1 ecn_mark 0 >>> new_flows_len 0 old_flows_len 0 >>> qdisc mq 0: dev wlan0 root >>> Sent 198495 bytes 816 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 0) >>> backlog 0b 0p requeues 0 >>> qdisc fq_codel 0: dev wlan0 parent :1 limit 1024p flows 1024 quantum = 300 target 5.0ms interval 100.0ms ecn >>> Sent 3709 bytes 19 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 0) >>> backlog 0b 0p requeues 0 >>> maxpacket 256 drop_overlimit 0 new_flow_count 0 ecn_mark 0 >>> new_flows_len 0 old_flows_len 0 >>> qdisc fq_codel 0: dev wlan0 parent :2 limit 1024p flows 1024 quantum = 300 target 5.0ms interval 100.0ms ecn >>> Sent 112 bytes 1 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 0) >>> backlog 0b 0p requeues 0 >>> maxpacket 256 drop_overlimit 0 new_flow_count 0 ecn_mark 0 >>> new_flows_len 0 old_flows_len 0 >>> qdisc fq_codel 0: dev wlan0 parent :3 limit 1024p flows 1024 quantum = 300 target 5.0ms interval 100.0ms ecn >>> Sent 194674 bytes 796 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 0) >>> backlog 0b 0p requeues 0 >>> maxpacket 256 drop_overlimit 0 new_flow_count 0 ecn_mark 0 >>> new_flows_len 0 old_flows_len 0 >>> qdisc fq_codel 0: dev wlan0 parent :4 limit 1024p flows 1024 quantum = 300 target 5.0ms interval 100.0ms ecn >>> Sent 0 bytes 0 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 0) >>> backlog 0b 0p requeues 0 >>> maxpacket 256 drop_overlimit 0 new_flow_count 0 ecn_mark 0 >>> new_flows_len 0 old_flows_len 0 >>> qdisc mq 0: dev wlan1 root >>> Sent 53249 bytes 323 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 0) >>> backlog 0b 0p requeues 0 >>> qdisc fq_codel 0: dev wlan1 parent :1 limit 1024p flows 1024 quantum = 300 target 5.0ms interval 100.0ms ecn >>> Sent 1337 bytes 9 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 0) >>> backlog 0b 0p requeues 0 >>> maxpacket 256 drop_overlimit 0 new_flow_count 0 ecn_mark 0 >>> new_flows_len 0 old_flows_len 0 >>> qdisc fq_codel 0: dev wlan1 parent :2 limit 1024p flows 1024 quantum = 300 target 5.0ms interval 100.0ms ecn >>> Sent 0 bytes 0 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 0) >>> backlog 0b 0p requeues 0 >>> maxpacket 256 drop_overlimit 0 new_flow_count 0 ecn_mark 0 >>> new_flows_len 0 old_flows_len 0 >>> qdisc fq_codel 0: dev wlan1 parent :3 limit 1024p flows 1024 quantum = 300 target 5.0ms interval 100.0ms ecn >>> Sent 51912 bytes 314 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 0) >>> backlog 0b 0p requeues 0 >>> maxpacket 256 drop_overlimit 0 new_flow_count 0 ecn_mark 0 >>> new_flows_len 0 old_flows_len 0 >>> qdisc fq_codel 0: dev wlan1 parent :4 limit 1024p flows 1024 quantum = 300 target 5.0ms interval 100.0ms ecn >>> Sent 0 bytes 0 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 0) >>> backlog 0b 0p requeues 0 >>> maxpacket 256 drop_overlimit 0 new_flow_count 0 ecn_mark 0 >>> new_flows_len 0 old_flows_len 0 >>> qdisc cake 8009: dev pppoe-wan root refcnt 2 bandwidth 850Kbit = diffserv4 flows atm overhead 40 >> Good, egress accounts for the link layer adaptation. >>=20 >>> Sent 0 bytes 0 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 0) >>> backlog 0b 0p requeues 0 >>> Class 0 Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 >>> rate 850Kbit 796880bit 637504bit 212496bit >>> target 21.3ms 22.7ms 28.3ms 85.0ms >>> interval 170.1ms 181.4ms 226.8ms 680.4ms >>> Pk delay 0us 0us 0us 0us >>> Av delay 0us 0us 0us 0us >>> Sp delay 0us 0us 0us 0us >>> pkts 0 0 0 0 >>> way inds 0 0 0 0 >>> way miss 0 0 0 0 >>> way cols 0 0 0 0 >>> bytes 0 0 0 0 >>> drops 0 0 0 0 >>> marks 0 0 0 0 >>> qdisc ingress ffff: dev pppoe-wan parent ffff:fff1 ---------------- >>> Sent 68 bytes 1 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 0) >>> backlog 0b 0p requeues 0 >>> qdisc cake 800a: dev ifb4pppoe-wan root refcnt 2 bandwidth 8500Kbit = besteffort flows atm overhead 40 >> So, I would be interested to learn how this now performs with = netperfrunner and/or betterspeedtest.sh >>=20 >>=20 >> Best Regards >> Sebastian >>=20 >>=20 >>> Sent 90 bytes 1 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 0) >>> backlog 0b 0p requeues 0 >>> Class 0 >>> rate 8500Kbit >>> target 5.0ms >>> interval 100.0ms >>> Pk delay 0us >>> Av delay 0us >>> Sp delay 0us >>> pkts 1 >>> way inds 0 >>> way miss 1 >>> way cols 0 >>> bytes 90 >>> drops 0 >>> marks 0 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> On 10/07/15 20:50, Sebastian Moeller wrote: >>>> Hi Fred, >>>>=20 >>>> On Jul 10, 2015, at 21:45 , Fred Stratton = wrote: >>>>=20 >>>>> These are the latest scripts, AFAIK >>>> Let me repeat my question: are these the scripts I attached in = one of the last mails, or the most recent scripts from = ceropackages-3.10? The version in the openwrt repository is NOT recent, = yet. Pushing the latest verso into openwrt is on my todo list but that = will need a bit more changes, so please try the files I attached which = should work (unless I screwed up and attached the wrong version). Also I = have no working cake on my router and hence require help for testing and = that means there might be some undiscovered bugs in there. >>>>=20 >>>>> no overhead allowance. I note. >>>> Well, that should work with the most recent version >>>>=20 >>>> Best Regards >>>> Sebastian >>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> On 10/07/15 20:40, Sebastian Moeller wrote: >>>>>> Hi Fred, >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> On Jul 10, 2015, at 21:34 , Fred Stratton = wrote: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> bridge sync is circa 10 000 kbit/s >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> with the cake option in sqm enabled >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> config queue 'eth1' >>>>>>> option qdisc_advanced '0' >>>>>>> option enabled '1' >>>>>>> option interface 'pppoe-wan' >>>>>>> option upload '850' >>>>>>> option qdisc 'cake' >>>>>>> option script 'simple_pppoe.qos' >>>>>>> option linklayer 'atm' >>>>>>> option overhead '40' >>>>>>> option download =918500' >>>>>> So this looks reasonable. Then again, if the DSLAM is under = provisioned/oversubscribed (=3D congested) shaping uypur DSL link might = not fix all buffer bloat.. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> tc -s qdisc show dev pppoe-wan >>>>>>> qdisc htb 1: root refcnt 2 r2q 10 default 12 direct_packets_stat = 0 direct_qlen 3 >>>>>>> Sent 101336 bytes 440 pkt (dropped 2, overlimits 66 requeues 0) >>>>>>> backlog 0b 0p requeues 0 >>>>>>> qdisc cake 110: parent 1:11 unlimited diffserv4 flows raw >>>>>>> Sent 4399 bytes 25 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 0) >>>>>>> backlog 0b 0p requeues 0 >>>>>>> Class 0 Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 >>>>>>> rate 0bit 0bit 0bit 0bit >>>>>>> target 5.0ms 5.0ms 5.0ms 5.0ms >>>>>>> interval 100.0ms 100.0ms 100.0ms 100.0ms >>>>>>> Pk delay 0us 0us 7us 2us >>>>>>> Av delay 0us 0us 0us 0us >>>>>>> Sp delay 0us 0us 0us 0us >>>>>>> pkts 0 0 22 3 >>>>>>> way inds 0 0 0 0 >>>>>>> way miss 0 0 22 2 >>>>>>> way cols 0 0 0 0 >>>>>>> bytes 0 0 3392 1007 >>>>>>> drops 0 0 0 0 >>>>>>> marks 0 0 0 0 >>>>>>> qdisc cake 120: parent 1:12 unlimited diffserv4 flows raw >>>>>>> Sent 96937 bytes 415 pkt (dropped 2, overlimits 0 requeues 0) >>>>>>> backlog 0b 0p requeues 0 >>>>>>> Class 0 Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 >>>>>>> rate 0bit 0bit 0bit 0bit >>>>>>> target 5.0ms 5.0ms 5.0ms 5.0ms >>>>>>> interval 100.0ms 100.0ms 100.0ms 100.0ms >>>>>>> Pk delay 0us 28.0ms 0us 0us >>>>>>> Av delay 0us 1.2ms 0us 0us >>>>>>> Sp delay 0us 4us 0us 0us >>>>>>> pkts 0 417 0 0 >>>>>>> way inds 0 0 0 0 >>>>>>> way miss 0 23 0 0 >>>>>>> way cols 0 0 0 0 >>>>>>> bytes 0 98951 0 0 >>>>>>> drops 0 2 0 0 >>>>>>> marks 0 0 0 0 >>>>>>> qdisc cake 130: parent 1:13 unlimited diffserv4 flows raw >>>>>>> Sent 0 bytes 0 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 0) >>>>>>> backlog 0b 0p requeues 0 >>>>>>> Class 0 Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 >>>>>>> rate 0bit 0bit 0bit 0bit >>>>>>> target 5.0ms 5.0ms 5.0ms 5.0ms >>>>>>> interval 100.0ms 100.0ms 100.0ms 100.0ms >>>>>>> Pk delay 0us 0us 0us 0us >>>>>>> Av delay 0us 0us 0us 0us >>>>>>> Sp delay 0us 0us 0us 0us >>>>>>> pkts 0 0 0 0 >>>>>>> way inds 0 0 0 0 >>>>>>> way miss 0 0 0 0 >>>>>>> way cols 0 0 0 0 >>>>>>> bytes 0 0 0 0 >>>>>>> drops 0 0 0 0 >>>>>>> marks 0 0 0 0 >>>>>>> qdisc cake 140: parent 1:14 unlimited diffserv4 flows raw >>>>>>> Sent 0 bytes 0 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 0) >>>>>>> backlog 0b 0p requeues 0 >>>>>>> Class 0 Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 >>>>>>> rate 0bit 0bit 0bit 0bit >>>>>>> target 5.0ms 5.0ms 5.0ms 5.0ms >>>>>>> interval 100.0ms 100.0ms 100.0ms 100.0ms >>>>>>> Pk delay 0us 0us 0us 0us >>>>>>> Av delay 0us 0us 0us 0us >>>>>>> Sp delay 0us 0us 0us 0us >>>>>>> pkts 0 0 0 0 >>>>>>> way inds 0 0 0 0 >>>>>>> way miss 0 0 0 0 >>>>>>> way cols 0 0 0 0 >>>>>>> bytes 0 0 0 0 >>>>>>> drops 0 0 0 0 >>>>>>> marks 0 0 0 0 >>>>>>> qdisc ingress ffff: parent ffff:fff1 ---------------- >>>>>>> Sent 273341 bytes 435 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 0) >>>>>>> backlog 0b 0p requeues 0 >>>>>> But this is the hallmark of out of date sqm-scripts, this just = uses cake as leaf qdisc and keeps HTB as the main shaper; a = configuration that is useful for testing. I assume this is the old set = of sqm-scripts not the update I just sent as attachment? If so could you = retry with the newer scripts, please? >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Best Regards >>>>>> Sebastian >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> On 10/07/15 19:46, Sebastian Moeller wrote: >>>>>>>> Hi Fred, >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> your results seem to indicate that cake is not active at all, = as the latency under load is abysmal (a quick check is to look at the = median in relation to the min and the 90% number, in your examples all = of these are terrible). Could you please post the result of the = following commands on your router: >>>>>>>> 1) cat /etc/config/sqm >>>>>>>> 2) tc -d qdisc >>>>>>>> 3) tc -d class show dev pppoe-wan >>>>>>>> 4) tc -d class show dev ifb4pppoe-wqn >>>>>>>> 5) /etc/init.d/sqm stop >>>>>>>> 6) /etc/init.d/sqm start >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> hopefully these give some insight what might have happened. >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> And finally I would love to learn the output of: >>>>>>>> sh betterspeedtest.sh -4 -H netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net -t 150 = -p netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net -n 4 ; sh netperfrunner.sh -4 -H = netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net -t 150 -p netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net -n 4 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> Many Thanks & Best Regards >>>>>>>> Sebastian >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> On Jul 10, 2015, at 20:25 , Fred Stratton = wrote: >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> By your command >>>>>>>>> Rebooted to rerun qdisc script, rather than changing qdiscs = from the command-line, so suboptimal process as end-point changed. >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> script configuring qdiscs and overhead 40 on >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> sh netperfrunner.sh -H netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net -p 2.96.48.1 >>>>>>>>> 2015-07-10 18:22:08 Testing netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net (ipv4) = with 4 streams down and up while pinging 2.96.48.1. Takes about 60 = seconds. >>>>>>>>> Download: 6.73 Mbps >>>>>>>>> Upload: 0.58 Mbps >>>>>>>>> Latency: (in msec, 62 pings, 0.00% packet loss) >>>>>>>>> Min: 24.094 >>>>>>>>> 10pct: 172.654 >>>>>>>>> Median: 260.563 >>>>>>>>> Avg: 253.580 >>>>>>>>> 90pct: 330.003 >>>>>>>>> Max: 411.145 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> script configuring qdiscs on flows raw >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> sh netperfrunner.sh -H netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net -p >>>>>>>>> 78.145.32.1 >>>>>>>>> 2015-07-10 18:49:21 Testing netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net (ipv4) = with 4 streams down and up while pinging 78.145.32.1. Takes about 60 = seconds. >>>>>>>>> Download: 6.75 Mbps >>>>>>>>> Upload: 0.59 Mbps >>>>>>>>> Latency: (in msec, 59 pings, 0.00% packet loss) >>>>>>>>> Min: 23.605 >>>>>>>>> 10pct: 169.789 >>>>>>>>> Median: 282.155 >>>>>>>>> Avg: 267.099 >>>>>>>>> 90pct: 333.283 >>>>>>>>> Max: 376.509 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> script configuring qdiscs and overhead 36 on >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> sh netperfrunner.sh -H netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net -p >>>>>>>>> 80.44.96.1 >>>>>>>>> 2015-07-10 19:20:18 Testing netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net (ipv4) = with 4 streams down and up while pinging 80.44.96.1. Takes about 60 = seconds. >>>>>>>>> Download: 6.56 Mbps >>>>>>>>> Upload: 0.59 Mbps >>>>>>>>> Latency: (in msec, 62 pings, 0.00% packet loss) >>>>>>>>> Min: 22.975 >>>>>>>>> 10pct: 195.473 >>>>>>>>> Median: 281.756 >>>>>>>>> Avg: 271.609 >>>>>>>>> 90pct: 342.130 >>>>>>>>> Max: 398.573 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> On 10/07/15 16:19, Alan Jenkins wrote: >>>>>>>>>> I'm glad to hear there's a working version (even if it's not = in the current build :). >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> Do you have measurable improvements with overhead configured = (v.s. unconfigured)? >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> I've used netperfrunner from CeroWrtScripts, e.g. >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> sh netperfrunner.sh -H netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net -p = $ISP_ROUTER >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> I believe accounting for overhead helps on this two-way test, = because a) it saturates the uplink b) about half that bandwidth is tiny = ack packets (depending on bandwidth asymmetry). And small packets have = proportionally high overhead. >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> (But it seems to only make a small difference for me, which = always surprises Seb). >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> Alan >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> On 10/07/15 15:52, Fred Stratton wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> You are absolutely correct. >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> I tried both a numeric overhead value, and alternatively = 'pppoe-vcmux' >>>>>>>>>>> and 'ether-fcs' in the build I crafted based on r46006, = which is lupin >>>>>>>>>>> undeclared version 2. Everything works as stated. >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> On lupin undeclared version 4, the current release based on = r46117, the >>>>>>>>>>> values were not recognised. >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> Thank you. >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> I had cake running on a Lantiq ADSL gateway running the same = r46006 >>>>>>>>>>> build. Unfortunately this was bricked by attempts to get = homenet >>>>>>>>>>> working, so I have nothing to report about gateway usage at = present. >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> On 10/07/15 13:57, Jonathan Morton wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> You're already using correct syntax - I've written it to be = quite >>>>>>>>>>>> lenient and use sensible defaults for missing information. = There are >>>>>>>>>>>> several sets of keywords and parameters which are mutually = orthogonal, >>>>>>>>>>>> and don't depend on each other, so "besteffort" has nothing = to do with >>>>>>>>>>>> "overhead" or "atm". >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> What's probably happening is that you're using a slightly = old version >>>>>>>>>>>> of the cake kernel module which lacks the overhead = parameter entirely, >>>>>>>>>>>> but a more up to date tc which does support it. We've seen = this >>>>>>>>>>>> combination crop up ourselves recently. >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> - Jonathan Morton >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list >>>>>>>>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net >>>>>>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel >=20