From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-we0-x22a.google.com (mail-we0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c03::22a]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9325421F1E9 for ; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 09:35:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-we0-f170.google.com with SMTP id w61so498818wes.29 for ; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 09:35:17 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=fm1Pn5H1QB2+Bq73uJhGYxla1gjxHfn1LCh+7I1f6es=; b=nEhTsCq9uOhyd/pBI7f3kRi9yB9lQjUXW3xg1wlu2CPz1DEUm+HrpCuSATEHBWclsq l4GILZOFa0Xum6UhoeEFfc2Q0/xFeIU3e/nObf2TJVWd4WS21G69hNMHHOo9xfaggW8y 84MTA+8Gkh4HE96Vb0kfMCp+NG3gcdanMMaAEs9WM6CrOI7QM0sJO9uExlSAWKiG81Wk CWJUfiqBQHw/H7X0FWL6dqU8boXvWLXmN6sS7lZsq35ph6YD2aAgijHKNJEkYYfTQouv Taodv0B78ZvHD5PDUJsDBkk8gBUFBJgEu7CB301E20L223M4Py4PPQv20riP5Tbscl/S q61w== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.97.37 with SMTP id dx5mr23051779wib.53.1395765315602; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 09:35:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.8.1 with HTTP; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 09:35:15 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <171F2F69-A85F-440B-8126-E9813D1EEEF0@gmail.com> References: <171F2F69-A85F-440B-8126-E9813D1EEEF0@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 09:35:15 -0700 Message-ID: From: Dave Taht To: Rich Brown Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: cerowrt-devel Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] speedtest.sh script available 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: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 16:35:20 -0000 I suggest renaming it to something like bloattest, to avoid copyright and trademark issues. If you can come up with a sexier name, goferit... (I have had a name in hiding for a while, "lul" - latency under load, you are welcome to it) ahh... my old friend... awk... If you change the script to use /bin/sh it works directly on cero! I have longed to have some sort of sane test server infrastructure in place, tied to a domain that did geographic dns, for a long time. Are you going to incur any costs in doing this? community driven and ad-supported seems like a way to go except that shell scripts don't have ads... I'd argue in favor of throwing out the first 25 sec of the test if you aren't already due to speedboost. 1) This is a box connected directly to the internet: cero2@snapon:~/t$ ./speedtest.sh Testing against netperf.richb-hanover.com while pinging gstatic.com (60 seconds in each direction) ....................................................................... Download: 261.94 Mbps Latency: (in msec, 71 pings, 0.00% packet loss) Min: 0.868 10pct: 0.930 Median: 1.070 Avg: 1.056 90pct: 1.150 Max: 1.420 ....................................................................... Upload: 333.91 Mbps Latency: (in msec, 71 pings, 0.00% packet loss) Min: 0.812 10pct: 0.900 Median: 1.020 Avg: 1.273 90pct: 2.040 Max: 2.770 Yes, I'm less than a ms away from gstatic. cero2@snapon:~/t$ ping gstatic.com PING gstatic.com (74.125.239.143) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from nuq05s02-in-f15.1e100.net (74.125.239.143): icmp_req=3D1 ttl=3D59 time=3D0.924 ms 64 bytes from nuq05s02-in-f15.1e100.net (74.125.239.143): icmp_req=3D2 ttl=3D59 time=3D0.915 ms 2) Run from my nuc d@nuc:~/t$ ./speedtest.sh Testing against netperf.richb-hanover.com while pinging gstatic.com (60 seconds in each direction) ....................................................................... Download: 21.6 Mbps Latency: (in msec, 71 pings, 0.00% packet loss) Min: 16.100 10pct: 16.600 Median: 19.700 Avg: 19.966 90pct: 23.900 Max: 27.600 ....................................................................... Upload: 3.55 Mbps Latency: (in msec, 71 pings, 0.00% packet loss) Min: 15.900 10pct: 17.500 Median: 22.800 Avg: 22.821 90pct: 26.400 Max: 32.000 I then tried the armory's comcast connection... 3) Run from cero root@dave-gw:~# ./speedtest.sh Testing against netperf.richb-hanover.com while pinging gstatic.com (60 seconds in each direction) ............................................................. Download: 19.48 Mbps Latency: (in msec, 61 pings, 0.00% packet loss) Min: 16.782 10pct: 17.921 Median: 20.288 Avg: 21.067 90pct: 25.415 Max: 38.299 ............................................................. Upload: 3.92 Mbps++ Latency: (in msec, 61 pings, 0.00% packet loss) Min: 18.355 10pct: 20.160 Median: 24.675 Avg: 24.385 90pct: 27.600 Max: 30.972 So we still have some variance in calculating up/download speeds... 4) Run from cero with sqm off: root@comcast-gw:~# ./speedtest.sh Testing against netperf.richb-hanover.com while pinging gstatic.com (60 seconds in each direction) ............................................................. Download: 28.1 Mbps +the sqm system is set to 30000 down Latency: (in msec, 61 pings, 0.00% packet loss) Min: 17.246 10pct: 151.227 Median: 219.129 Avg: 197.213 90pct: 230.134 Max: 237.868 .............................................................. Upload: 4.55 Mbps Latency: (in msec, 62 pings, 0.00% packet loss) Min: 16.744 10pct: 384.688 Median: 586.156 Avg: 579.208 90pct: 755.223 Max: 872.024 5) for comparison, a rrul test is at http://snapon.lab.bufferbloat.net/~d/richb-hannover/richb-compare.svg So not doing 4 up and down at the same time gives you latency results at max that are quite a bit larger than a single flow (which makes sense for tcp without congestion avoidance working) and microscopic upload performance compared to what the upload along claims= . sqm settings config queue 'ge00' option interface 'ge00' option script 'simplest.qos' option linklayer 'none' option enabled '1' option download '30000' option upload '4400' option qdisc_advanced '1' option ingress_ecn 'ECN' option egress_ecn 'ECN' option qdisc_really_really_advanced '1' option iqdisc_opts 'target 5ms' option eqdisc_opts 'target 5ms' option qdisc 'nfq_codel' On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 8:16 AM, Rich Brown wrote= : > I have created a 'speedtest.sh' shell script that simulates the http://sp= eedtest.net, but does it one better. > > The default options for the script do a separate TCP_MAERTS and TCP_STREA= M for 60 seconds while collecting ping latency. The output of the script sh= ows the down/upload speed as well as a summary of the ping latency, includi= ng min, max, average, median, and 10th and 90th percentiles. > > The script makes it easier to optimize my settings because it makes the l= atency figures more concrete. (I used to eyeball the ping output, saying, "= Hmmm. I think there were fewer outliers than before...") > > You can see the script on the "Quick Test for Bufferbloat" page on the wi= ki at: > > http://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/cerowrt/wiki/Quick_Test_for_Bufferblo= at#Speedtestsh-shell-script > > Enjoy! > > Rich > _______________________________________________ > Cerowrt-devel mailing list > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel --=20 Dave T=E4ht Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt: http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.= html