From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-we0-x234.google.com (mail-we0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c03::234]) (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 437CD21F100 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2013 11:49:49 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-we0-f180.google.com with SMTP id t61so8580402wes.11 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2013 11:49:47 -0800 (PST) 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; bh=J3D8r9+DjVTh6PnH+Na9VXWejD8QJb4L00DSwdWOBb4=; b=RC8q0NFTOndHu63f/ZRObpaY/SGLDB/kZvSgGR71+pihZGY00N9GMGIsdt9aWRcHyy 1vgWPdNDROSzeLzYAaZN+X4JWSM+sDIaThPdQ3NZUmJHmetPNg95WorauvzHU6UbvJd4 Uwv6lInYDB2xp2fkDxssxnzoqrmD6l1WFMr7IXeVmS8T6zx6PxHjsCzMi+i00YPx7ELN dTRGSAA2YNv6GLLi0tEpZQabUkz2jxBrR+JRF6pYHYsKQAzdfFZXV9/fzM3kwarAftMT ccHsOx92ZBUbi6xlFlGhIBk4YKcPmZn7m0C6RPD0QSC70mAsViRCYWAjsGg6TbWbp0UF 2TTA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.37.69 with SMTP id w5mr34979650wij.53.1388173787003; Fri, 27 Dec 2013 11:49:47 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.217.123.69 with HTTP; Fri, 27 Dec 2013 11:49:46 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.217.123.69 with HTTP; Fri, 27 Dec 2013 11:49:46 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <76A010B1-F6DB-4DF8-98A7-6F43974B72D6@gmx.de> References: <571C0EE5-DC15-4A9C-A195-A97F93A335EB@gmail.com> <52BDD08F.2000904@imap.cc> <52BDD303.8070102@imap.cc> <76A010B1-F6DB-4DF8-98A7-6F43974B72D6@gmx.de> Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2013 11:49:46 -0800 Message-ID: From: Dave Taht To: Sebastian Moeller Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8f502e8a7601f504ee89655e Cc: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] Fwd: Re: CeroWrt 3.10.24-8 badly bloated? 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, 27 Dec 2013 19:49:49 -0000 --e89a8f502e8a7601f504ee89655e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Pie has a default latency target of 20ms, fq codel 5ms. (But the fq code target matters less as the target only applies to queue building flows) A packet takes 13ms to transit the device at 1mbit. There is a change to fq codel in this release that should make fiddling with target a low speeds less needed. (But might have other problems) Still a comparison at roughly the same target vs a vs pie in your environment would be very interesting. I suggested 25ms as a test (as pie never makes 20ms anyway) I came close to inserting a simple formula to start increasing the target below 4mbit in this release. On Dec 27, 2013 11:25 AM, "Sebastian Moeller" wrote: > > Hi Fred, > > you could try to put "target 25ms" without the quotes into the advanced egress options field in the "Queue Discipline" tab, that is exposed after checking "Show Dangerous Configuration". I would love to hear whether that worked or not (I am not able to test anything myself). Maybe posting the output of "tc -d qdisc" and "tc class show dev ge00" would help. Good luck= =85 > > > Best Regards > Sebastian > > > On Dec 27, 2013, at 20:20 , Fred Stratton wrote: > > > I have been using pie for approximately 3 weeks. > > > > You are correct, in that the outbound speed is about 800 - 900 kb/s. > > > > I shall try what you suggest, but do not know how to express the target of 25 ms as a configuration option. > > > > > > On 27/12/13 19:15, Dave Taht wrote: > >> Dear fred: are you sticking with pie? I was going to suggest you try fq codel with a target 25ms on your outbound. (You are at 800kbit or so as best I recall?) > >> > >> On Dec 27, 2013 11:10 AM, "Fred Stratton" wrote= : > >> I upgraded to 3.10.24-8 on 2013-12-23. > >> > >> I modified /etc/fixdaemons, adding > >> /etc/init.d/sqm restart > >> > >> input the appropriate sqm settings, transcribed from aqm > >> > >> rebooted > >> > >> and the build works very well. For ADSL2+ here, it is the best so far. > >> > >> > >> On 27/12/13 18:55, Dave Taht wrote: > >>> A race condition appears to have crept in... > >>> > >>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > >>> From: "Dave Taht" > >>> Date: Dec 27, 2013 10:47 AM > >>> Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] CeroWrt 3.10.24-8 badly bloated? > >>> To: "Richard E. Brown" > >>> Cc: > >>> > >>> Probably didn't start sqm properly > >>> > >>> Restart it by hand via /etc/init.d/sqm restart > >>> > >>> tc -s qdisc show dev ge00 > >>> > >>> Should show htb and fq codel. > >>> > >>> On Dec 27, 2013 10:36 AM, "Rich Brown" wrote: > >>> So I screwed up my courage and replaced my 3.10.18-? firmware in my primary router with 3.10.24-8. That version had worked well as a secondary, so I figured, What the heck=85 Let=92s give it try. > >>> > >>> The result was not pretty. I set my link speeds in the SQM page, chose the defaults for the Queue Discipline tab, and link layer to ATM with no additional overhead for my DSL link. > >>> > >>> Ping times to google are normally ~51-54 msec. But when I fired up speedtest.net, they jumped to 1500-2500 msec. Is there something I should look at before reverting? Thanks. > >>> > >>> Rich > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> 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 > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Cerowrt-devel mailing list > > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel > --e89a8f502e8a7601f504ee89655e Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Pie has a default latency target of 20ms, fq codel 5ms. (But the fq code ta= rget matters less as the target only applies to queue building flows)

A packet takes 13ms to transit the device at 1mbit.

There is a change to fq codel in this release that should ma= ke fiddling with target a low speeds less needed. (But might have other pro= blems) Still a comparison at roughly the same target vs a vs pie in your en= vironment would be very interesting.

I suggested 25ms as a test (as pie never makes 20ms anyway)<= /p>

I came close to inserting a simple formula to start increasi= ng the target below 4mbit in this release.

On Dec 27, 2013 11:25 AM, "Sebastian Moeller" <= moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
>
> Hi Fred,
>
> you could try to put "target 25ms" without the quotes into t= he advanced egress options field in the "Queue Discipline" tab, t= hat is exposed after checking "Show Dangerous Configuration". I w= ould love to hear whether that worked or not (I am not able to test anythin= g myself). Maybe posting the output of "tc -d qdisc" and "tc= class show dev ge00" would help. Good luck=85
>
>
> Best Regards
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Sebastian
>
>
> On Dec 27, 2013, at 20:20 , Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc>= wrote:
>
> > I have been using pie for approximately 3 weeks.
> >
> > You are correct, in that the outbound speed is about 800 - 900 kb= /s.
> >
> > I shall try what you suggest, but do not know how to express the = target of 25 ms as a configuration option.
> >
> >
> > On 27/12/13 19:15, Dave Taht wrote:
> >> Dear fred: are you sticking with pie? I was going to suggest = you try fq codel with a target 25ms on your outbound. (You are at 800kbit o= r so as best I recall?)
> >>
> >> On Dec 27, 2013 11:10 AM, "Fred Stratton" <freds= tratton@imap.cc> wrote:
> >> I upgraded to 3.10.24-8 on 2013-12-23.
> >>
> >> I modified /etc/fixdaemons, adding
> >> /etc/init.d/sqm restart
> >>
> >> input the appropriate sqm settings, transcribed from aqm
> >>
> >> rebooted
> >>
> >> and the build works very well. For ADSL2+ here, it is the bes= t so far.
> >>
> >>
> >> On 27/12/13 18:55, Dave Taht wrote:
> >>> A race condition appears to have crept in...
> >>>
> >>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> >>> From: "Dave Taht" <dave.taht@gmail.com>
> >>> Date: Dec 27, 2013 10:47 AM
> >>> Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] CeroWrt 3.10.24-8 badly bloa= ted?
> >>> To: "Richard E. Brown" <richb.hanover@gmail.com>
> >>> Cc:
> >>>
> >>> Probably didn't start sqm properly
> >>>
> >>> Restart it by hand via /etc/init.d/sqm restart
> >>>
> >>> tc -s qdisc show dev ge00
> >>>
> >>> Should show htb and fq codel.
> >>>
> >>> On Dec 27, 2013 10:36 AM, "Rich Brown" <richb.hanover@gmail.com> wrot= e:
> >>> So I screwed up my courage and replaced my 3.10.18-? firm= ware in my primary router with 3.10.24-8. That version had worked well as a= secondary, so I figured, What the heck=85 Let=92s give it try.
> >>>
> >>> The result was not pretty. I set my link speeds in the SQ= M page, chose the defaults for the Queue Discipline tab, and link layer to = ATM with no additional overhead for my DSL link.
> >>>
> >>> Ping times to google are normally ~51-54 msec. But when I= fired up speedtest.net, they jumped t= o 1500-2500 msec. Is there something I should look at before reverting? Tha= nks.
> >>>
> >>> Rich
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
> >>> Ce= rowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
> >>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
> >>>
> >>> Ce= rowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
> >>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Cerowrt-devel mailing list
> > Cerowrt-de= vel@lists.bufferbloat.net
> > = https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>

--e89a8f502e8a7601f504ee89655e--