Re: [Cerowrt-devel] Torrents are too fast

[Dane Medic <dm70dm@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4865 bytes --]

Hi,

correct, I've left egress on 4000 (I thought I should test only ingress
first), but when I did the test with youtube + torrent transfer, I've had
set upload to very small number (I think 10 kbytes/s).

Yes I have DSL line (VDSL2 as I've read ISP info), I'll try to set the
linklayer option on ethernet with overhead of 8, like it says on
http://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/cerowrt/wiki/Setting_up_SQM_for_CeroWrt_310
I have linux machine so I'll install netperf-wrapper and test things

sqm configuration:

root@cerowrt:~# uci show sqm
sqm.ge00=queue
sqm.ge00.interface=ge00
sqm.ge00.qdisc=fq_codel
sqm.ge00.script=simple.qos
sqm.ge00.qdisc_advanced=1
sqm.ge00.ingress_ecn=ECN
sqm.ge00.egress_ecn=NOECN
sqm.ge00.qdisc_really_really_advanced=1
sqm.ge00.itarget=auto
sqm.ge00.etarget=auto
sqm.ge00.linklayer=none
sqm.ge00.download=3100
sqm.ge00.upload=4000
sqm.ge00.enabled=1

Thank you guys,
Dane

2014-11-21 12:16 GMT+01:00 Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>:

> Hi Dane,
>
>
> On Nov 20, 2014, at 15:13 , Dane Medic <dm70dm@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > dpreed, thank you for response. I'm already using fq_codel with cerowrt
> and I don't think it does what I want (or maybe I want too much :)
> >
> > So the steps I've made:
> > flashed wndr3700v2 with cerowrt 3.10.50-1 then I've measured:
> >
> > root@cerowrt:/usr/lib/CeroWrtScripts# sh betterspeedtest.sh -p
> wlan-si.net -t 120
> > 2014-11-20 12:18:34 Testing against netperf.bufferbloat.net (ipv4) with
> 5 simultaneous sessions while pinging wlan-si.net (120 seconds in each
> direction)
> >
> .........................................................................................................................
> >  Download:  3.78 Mbps
> >   Latency: (in msec, 119 pings, 0.00% packet loss)
> >       Min: 13.077
> >     10pct: 251.522
> >    Median: 317.851
> >       Avg: 308.497
> >     90pct: 371.033
> >       Max: 376.132
> >
> ............................................................................................................................
> >    Upload:  0.48 Mbps
> >   Latency: (in msec, 103 pings, 0.00% packet loss)
> >       Min: 12.278
> >     10pct: 12.727
> >    Median: 18.359
> >       Avg: 23.256
> >     90pct: 33.971
> >       Max: 180.303
> >
> > Then I've put these commands:
> >
> > uci set sqm.ge00.enabled=1
> > uci set sqm.ge00.download=3200
> > uci set sqm.ge00.qdisc=nfq_codel
> > uci commit sqm
> > reboot
> >
> > And another measure:
> >
> > root@cerowrt:/usr/lib/CeroWrtScripts# sh betterspeedtest.sh -p
> wlan-si.net -t 120
> > 2014-11-20 12:49:05 Testing against netperf.bufferbloat.net (ipv4) with
> 5 simultaneous sessions while pinging wlan-si.net (120 seconds in each
> direction)
> >
> .........................................................................................................................
> >  Download:  2.74 Mbps
> >   Latency: (in msec, 121 pings, 0.00% packet loss)
> >       Min: 12.210
> >     10pct: 13.002
> >    Median: 15.077
> >       Avg: 15.095
> >     90pct: 16.968
> >       Max: 18.599
> >
> .............................................................................................................................
> >    Upload:  0.49 Mbps
> >   Latency: (in msec, 101 pings, 0.00% packet loss)
> >       Min: 12.255
> >     10pct: 12.684
> >    Median: 16.679
> >       Avg: 23.100
> >     90pct: 34.019
> >       Max: 170.173
> >
> > The tests doesn't look bad, but the problem is I watch a video clip on
> youtube and my sister starts torrent client, I can't watch anymore.
>
>         Could you post the content of /etc/config/sqm from after
> activating SQM please. It looks like you did not activate shaping on egress
> (its not in the “ici set *” above and the upload statistics look identical
> to the first unshaped example). You really need to control the buffer in
> both directions to get rid of nasty latency spikes (especially with
> torrents that I assume  will try to use both directions maximally if left
> to their own devices). Also 4M/512K sounds like a DSL link, if so you might
> find the link layer adjustments helpful (if there are question what to fill
> in just ask). Also if you have a linux or macosx computer available I would
> recommend to install netperf-wrapper and use the RRUL test to
> simultaneously load down- and up-link (or alternatively netperfrunner.sh)
> as this will show bloated buffers more clearly than the individual tests
> for each direction as performed by betterspeedtest.sh.
>
> Best Regards
>         Sebastian
>
>
> >
> > Cheers
> > _______________________________________________
> > Cerowrt-devel mailing list
> > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
> > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 6448 bytes --]