From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-io0-x229.google.com (mail-io0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 38C213CBF3 for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 09:55:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-io0-x229.google.com with SMTP id o126so110107715iod.0 for ; Fri, 08 Apr 2016 06:55:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc; bh=m6ScoW4rOpO8X4QR2xXmzHwQN4Rhnt6VllsJeNN1MJU=; b=yE4Apw5EhFJt0zT/qkGWZbEt3msmgB3e5t8WOLv689hvJ9coisKMymMBoCdYhzE9sP z8IPnxPgaCbYHTMX4Hqp7IhCZT+QH9vz15Z305U+fjQDPM9ffMSpEUBiuT5+Bb1Mu2dS blJ2g6lumMLg+tRaCH6D6q1ISMI10zmUeFXrfCwJBfTWGtC9v0mNoZ6pHNVoL8kl68Rn QCZvo1KzN8erTIMkU7087+kBAG0ilGIKhAgx79JybdlSLXG7sNi//3Bbw5gvaI/OQ6J5 FNmH8dDYx9zlDYxMs6MrTv9P/3ed7yxf/V9OqvTcyX19y2Bm8Q/V6Ho/ZbihyiM8+Nsv L+2w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=m6ScoW4rOpO8X4QR2xXmzHwQN4Rhnt6VllsJeNN1MJU=; b=dI7J50OPH11FbLL0gZZkeE9QhaV8ErYfZIWL1xPOqSwLaO82heyrIUMdwEedEoGiet 9LnBFKtjN6BtSOTX0neHVJ8X8rIzJ4cV/Lulx/VRu880DycK3fJEr66Gmu83EeM6tVgG CME1M7wzBJoAv2sJr0dtAp/99fKNaOpNPsB030+M/jY6p8vDo5fDCp0NiiOtgotn34nm 49ynKKaQ8jh0lXl0+wUyRiMiXBegu1c+UgCbAEK08/jAdZaht3hSJqpMYRFC187NLRxR aCvF3rUWdZ39RMygyM66nseoTtz1b2qDrP+SzSZ1KFpVKp2s518KibDGuFAnW2KGt2fS TwoQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJK8VtY7bvxxQlfacOHeullqIIh4tWeJnPoPrOx9Wl2HkQgaNUNJib6q0lw3AgB0emRxUmYEYIckUg2NOQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.107.26.203 with SMTP id a194mr10900899ioa.115.1460123721706; Fri, 08 Apr 2016 06:55:21 -0700 (PDT) Sender: john.yates.sheets@gmail.com Received: by 10.50.116.168 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 06:55:21 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <66A42333-0801-45AF-B67E-B7CFAF22FE43@gmx.de> References: <57066793.5050608@gmail.com> <056D9AAF-85E2-4849-A3EC-4CE77276DF24@gmx.de> <57079B2F.8070607@gmail.com> <66A42333-0801-45AF-B67E-B7CFAF22FE43@gmx.de> Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2016 09:55:21 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: ol0nZrnH4ksO6_NF3flJ6YpBh14 Message-ID: From: John Yates To: Sebastian Moeller Cc: Richard Smith , "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113fd448c2b27b052ff98bed Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] Linksys wrt1900acs rrul traces X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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, 08 Apr 2016 13:55:22 -0000 --001a113fd448c2b27b052ff98bed Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sebastian, Recently you wrote: In your case select Ethernet with overhead, and manually put 24 into these > packet overhead field, as the kernel already accounted for 14 of the total > of 38. > and further down: > I assume in your case this will not change your results a lot, as you most > likely used full MTU packets in the test flows, I believe your low latency > under load increases show that you have not much buffer bloat left... I > would still recommend to use the correct per packet overhead to be on the > right side... > As a layman hoping to use some of this great technology on my forth coming Omni Turris boxes how am I supposed to derive these numbers? Is there a simple series of questions and answers that could figure them out? Could those be turned into some kind of "wizard"? Otherwise how do you expect large numbers of users to get their systems properly configured? Surely you do not want to engage in an email thread with each user who even attempts such configuration :-) /john --001a113fd448c2b27b052ff98bed Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sebastian,

Recently you wrote:

In your case select Ethernet with overhead, and manual= ly put 24 into these packet overhead field, as the kernel already accounted= for 14 of the total of 38.

and further= down:=C2=A0
=C2=A0
I assume= in your case this will not change your results a lot, as you most likely u= sed full MTU packets in the test flows, I believe your low latency under lo= ad increases show that you have not much buffer bloat left... I would still= recommend to use the correct per packet overhead to be on the right side..= .

As a layman hoping to use some of thi= s great technology on my forth coming Omni Turris boxes how am I supposed t= o derive these numbers?=C2=A0 Is there a simple series of questions and ans= wers that could figure them out?=C2=A0 Could those be turned into some kind= of "wizard"?=C2=A0 Otherwise how do you expect large numbers of = users to get their systems properly configured?=C2=A0 Surely you do not wan= t to engage in an email thread with each user who even attempts such config= uration :-)

/john
--001a113fd448c2b27b052ff98bed--