From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (swm.pp.se [212.247.200.143]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6642421F336 for ; Tue, 23 Jun 2015 22:19:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id 5821DA1; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 07:19:56 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=swm.pp.se; s=mail; t=1435123196; bh=2mYirUuFScOtUG4R1i/H3VUY9EXJCnuNn80cO/xMc4A=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=pys4UwqX5WVn1rPWxaL0y8gux2HfvKdvI6pb4RAjKdO8V1ED1zZ1dJhd/eKYKfAXv PwUjtzQmKNjKd5+qRP7HIkLWISFEKNGhbxfq57o+y7zXFyFDz6O6yQNghYUG2HdwvN 1cG2SRoaGLYFYg58j7dHGTlA+5bw+V7A6nQdbeD4= Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 548619F; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 07:19:56 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 07:19:56 +0200 (CEST) From: Mikael Abrahamsson To: Sebastian Moeller In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <26463A88-821B-44B7-A728-64BCB0B7C7BB@gmx.de> <55847E32.9000405@gmail.com> <5584823E.4040207@gmail.com> <0129B5FB-9D1B-45FF-84CA-492A6A0B638B@gmx.de> User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14) Organization: People's Front Against WWW MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="-137064504-1326426083-1435123196=:9487" Cc: cerowrt-devel 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: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 05:20:29 -0000 This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. ---137064504-1326426083-1435123196=:9487 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT On Tue, 23 Jun 2015, Sebastian Moeller wrote: > Thanks a lot, interesting data! Was this test stressing both > directions at the same time? (My guess is if the test was UDP i don’t > know, for a TCP test I am quite confident that it was uni-directional as > the @full MTU data does not show enough loss to accommodate the roughly > 2% reverse ACK traffic for the opposite direction). It was TCP using iperf3, so it was larger data packets one direction and ACKs going the other direction. > So basically (1 - (795.390410959/800))*100 = 0.58 % unexplained loss, not bad Oh, iperf3 can tell you packets lost, so I can re-run the tests and tell you exactly how many packets were lost and within what 1 second interval they were lost. My guess is that it would be better to run something else. My numbers were not meant to be as exact as you have used for calculation, I'd say I aimed for approximate number. I'll do a test run and give you more exact data. > As Dave said it would be nice see RRUL data from the same testbed. It > would be so nice if flint had a way to send different sized TCP packets… > (I guess this might be faked with MSS clamping in the router and > relaying on path MTU discovery?) That is my next thing to test. > The 1200AC retailed for around 200EUR in Germany the 1900ACv2 will > be closer to 300EUR I guess, not too expensive but certainly above my > impulse buy limit ;) Yes, I paid 195 EUR for it (1790 SEK), which includes 25% VAT. It's around 150 USD (not including tax) so I'm hoping it'll drop 10-20% in price when it's more widely available in Europe. -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se ---137064504-1326426083-1435123196=:9487--