From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ob0-x229.google.com (mail-ob0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::229]) (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 F242721F846 for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 11:59:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by obbkm3 with SMTP id km3so72655577obb.1 for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 11:59:52 -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=82GUGkpVkkx7aIwRFCpuM2zronml3oNaAQltsOPzJxs=; b=wrrmOgTNClYclakzJ9Jte9bc/tCs1Eg+/8zHAYxueHvIAH1cPzpoKrirOEq5gSjlHC 5wmGq6w3IUSxf96eVg05DAXDA48PbGGTV1fhAwuVXg128Pia/Zb2asAwzzGvzikairYS oJA3f+UMOOwJzzwlbhfEMpDfijNMlfsatOiOEjnNeMoWWZ/iyWDUofdiEV95O3cYm3OD gZYz4KZNNTRhKfB5lIbUd79Yenvam89DDoI9kwmMZ1ayAmsLhE9oMvrQtWLNupRXdWH9 mcd+uH/pZmahEgjD2rFE/UTzxB2LWBV3rmqM98nbtK7/46Gj3VxjczkS3A6GtycJarPd Vypw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.182.246.9 with SMTP id xs9mr333428obc.45.1435345191920; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 11:59:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.202.105.129 with HTTP; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 11:59:51 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <0129B5FB-9D1B-45FF-84CA-492A6A0B638B@gmx.de> <43D5C3CE-F1F4-4BA5-AEB9-55348661C7BA@gmx.de> Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2015 11:59:51 -0700 Message-ID: From: Dave Taht To: Mikael Abrahamsson Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] performance numbers from WRT1200AC (Re: Latest build test - new sqm-scripts seem to work; "cake overhead 40" didn't) 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, 26 Jun 2015 19:00:21 -0000 On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 11:58 AM, Dave Taht wrote: > On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 11:38 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson w= rote: >> On Fri, 26 Jun 2015, Dave Taht wrote: >> >>> Mikael, a simple test of the analysis I just did would be to use >>> ethtool to set your server to 100mbits (ethtool -s >>> your_ethernet_device advertise 0x008 and turn on fq_codel on both the >>> client and server. >> >> >> Hm what do you mean by "client" and "server"? your topology is: client box - router - server forcing the router - server link to 100mbit will push the egress buffering into the router for the rrul_50_up test in particular. >> Where do you want the queueing to happen? Egress from the WRT1200AC towa= rds >> the server? > > Yes. > >> Then setting the WAN port of the WRT1200AC to 100 megabit/s >> would work, yes. > > Yes, but I am unsure from looking at the driver that using ethtool on > the egress on the wrt1200ac will actually work, but > pretty sure it will work if you set it on the server. feel free to try bo= th. :) > >> >> -- >> Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se > > > > -- > Dave T=C3=A4ht > worldwide bufferbloat report: > http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/results/bufferbloat > And: > What will it take to vastly improve wifi for everyone? > https://plus.google.com/u/0/explore/makewififast --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht worldwide bufferbloat report: http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/results/bufferbloat And: What will it take to vastly improve wifi for everyone? https://plus.google.com/u/0/explore/makewififast