I have been collecting statistics on the behavior of the 3.7.5-2 version of cerowrt, and perhaps y'all out there can help. I've been doing four repeatable tests.
I feed the attached file into the chrome web page benchmark and run it 4 times:
1) No other load on the system
2) while running a single up and single down netperf stream to
icei.org (on the east coast)
3) then while still loaded, after turning on simple_qos.sh, set for ~85% of the rated up/down bandwidth...
4) then killing the load, and keeping simple_qos enabled.
I export each detailed (you have to select it) .csv output from that benchmark to a file.
I do it against a bidirectional stream - one each of
netperf -l 6000 -4 -H
icei.org -t TCP_MAERTS &
netperf -l 6000 -4 -H
icei.org -t TCP_STREAM &
(if you have ipv6, more power to you, kill the -4. )
then starting the web tests 10-20 seconds later. It's interesting to watch cero's bandwidth graphs while doing this.
There are netperf servers setup on the east (
icei.org) and west coast (
snapon.lab.bufferbloat.net) and a few other places. It would be sane to setup your own someplace you control (from netperf's svn compiled with --enable-demo), as it helps to have a shorter RTT to truly load up the link. You can also run the rrul test (preferably for 5 minutes or more because this test idea KILLs web page load times) to get a heavier load and more graphs.
If you are up to trying this test series, please let me know, send along the details of your setup, and the 4 csv files, and perhaps your data will show up in an upcoming paper.
The chrome web page benchmark can be had at:
And requires you fire off chrome with --enable-benchmarking
--
Dave Täht
Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt:
http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.html