From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ob0-x232.google.com (mail-ob0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::232]) (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 B028D21F500; Wed, 3 Sep 2014 12:30:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ob0-f178.google.com with SMTP id uy5so6472827obc.37 for ; Wed, 03 Sep 2014 12:30:42 -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=mCm5AiXNVhD+Itdqdc6onan0vDXHi+ffOp7gVItZZMM=; b=PH8+VGvVv5rhqTDJequSNuzZJw6cmrh/WJTst5yftiZ40W/Zpxb3y/yuLAUZbHe9q6 idJQJ7My/82SKhRk7nHF27nbCjn0rf+ZS9E3dFAC9jm7BpBNxCAQAck1dWR2Pr0rbFvC kajSAPcJdnsbM22IjkmDoHFsLNJIUJ3yZoxup3U5BDt06QMQhOSCM3FF9+jupVCosH0J XhXll9aYyvzuqqkWYnlc62bjWIit0GhpLHla75FSlWPRjhc1iiUcs9qwFxQyNC1DaUcg 3fkffGqDWjxyH5v0Ia8blbjxTnVHcEWGKcHQSXb41wSK5IHNLTjAPHyXTjDTyjGkjEv0 mZCw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.135.233 with SMTP id pv9mr5222589oeb.75.1409772642391; Wed, 03 Sep 2014 12:30:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.202.227.76 with HTTP; Wed, 3 Sep 2014 12:30:42 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <83C39F40-5D07-43B4-8D3A-5A087CCB2735@gmx.de> References: <87ppfijfjc.fsf@toke.dk> <4FF4917C-1B6D-4D5F-81B6-5FC177F12BFC@gmail.com> <4DA71387-6720-4A2F-B462-2E1295604C21@gmail.com> <0DB9E121-7073-4DE9-B7E2-73A41BCBA1D1@gmail.com> <0D3E3220-C12A-4238-974B-D83D13EF354E@gmail.com> <83C39F40-5D07-43B4-8D3A-5A087CCB2735@gmx.de> Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2014 12:30:42 -0700 Message-ID: From: Dave Taht To: Sebastian Moeller Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: Jonathan Morton , "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" , bloat Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] [Bloat] Comcast upped service levels -> WNDR3800 can't cope... 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: Wed, 03 Sep 2014 19:31:12 -0000 On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Sebastian Moeller wrote: > Hi Aaron, > > > On Sep 3, 2014, at 17:12 , Aaron Wood wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 4:08 AM, Jonathan Morton = wrote: >> Given that the CPU load is confirmed as high, the pcap probably isn't as= useful. The rest would be interesting to look at. >> >> Are you able to test with smaller packet sizes? That might help to isol= ate packet-throughput (ie. connection tracking) versus byte-throughput prob= lems. >> >> - Jonathan Morton >> >> Doing another test setup will take a few days (maybe not until the weeke= nd). But I can get the data uploaded, and do some preliminary crunching on= it. > > So the current SQM system allows to shape on multiple interfaces,= so you could set up the shaper on se00 and test between sw10 and se00 (sho= uld work if you reliably get fast enough wifi connection, something like co= mbined shaped bandwidth <=3D 70% of wifi rate should work). That would avoi= d the whole firewall and connection tracking logic. > My home wifi environment is quite variable/noisy and not well-sui= ted for this test: with rrul_be I got stuck at around 70Mbps combined bandw= idth, with different distributions of the up and down-leg for no-shaping, s= haping to 50Mbps10Mbps, and shaping to 100Mbps50Mbps. SIRQ got pretty much = pegged at 96-99% during all netperf-wrapper runs, so I assume this to be th= e bottleneck (the radio was in the > 200mbps range during the test with occ= asional drops to 150mbps). So my conclusion would: be it really is the shap= ing that is limited on my wndr3700v2 with cerowrt 3.10.50-1, again if I wou= ld be confident about the measurement which I am not (but EOUTOFTIME). That= or my rf environment might only allow for roughly 70-80Mbps combined throu= ghput. For what it is worth: test where performed between macbook running m= acosx 10.9.4 and hp proliant n54l running 64bit openSuse 13.1, kernel 3.11.= 10-17 (AMD turion with tg3 gbit ethernet adapter (BQL enabled), running fq_= codel on eth0), with sha > ping on the se00 interface. A note on wifi throughput. CeroWrt routes, rather than bridges, between interfaces. So I would expect for simple benchmarks, openwrt (which bridges) might show much better wifi<-> ethernet behavior. We route, rather than bridge wifi, because of 1) it made it easier to debug it, and 2) the theory that multicast on busier networks messes up wifi far more than not-bridging slows it down. Have not accumulated a lot of proof of this, but this was kind of enlightening: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-desmouceaux-ipv6-mcast-wifi-power-usage-00 I note that my regular benchmarking environment has mostly been 2 or more routers with nat and firewalling disabled. Given the trend towards looking at iptables and nat overhead on this thread, an ipv6 benchmark on this box might be revealing. > Best Regards > Sebastian > > >> >> -Aaron >> _______________________________________________ >> Cerowrt-devel mailing list >> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel > > _______________________________________________ > Cerowrt-devel mailing list > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht https://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/make-wifi-fast