From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (ipv6.swm.pp.se [IPv6:2a00:801::f]) (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 4E35A21F744 for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 05:26:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id 9B891A1; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 14:26:23 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=swm.pp.se; s=mail; t=1435321583; bh=qQ5hfYcxS6OtMGd32quh13gbS7Ph6V5JVzGMt1iKVpU=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=KoPLsXix76kyqlcirX0xrD+fRXMDrTPJzwXpKaWnJ9PHQ3ADOVuyHL8Bnt91tubWt dF/GNhH69b+sVKAwf3oqhnCXjtlW4tXOdfkOr7yBjcHY5JfpB6dDzhzSiPLciwLKbV wmSFc644OHEnWL3awXMzsWzreE580cXVo/V5KIeM= Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96A589F; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 14:26:23 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2015 14:26:23 +0200 (CEST) From: Mikael Abrahamsson To: Sebastian Moeller In-Reply-To: <43D5C3CE-F1F4-4BA5-AEB9-55348661C7BA@gmx.de> 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> <43D5C3CE-F1F4-4BA5-AEB9-55348661C7BA@gmx.de> User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14) Organization: People's Front Against WWW MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII 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: Fri, 26 Jun 2015 12:26:55 -0000 On Fri, 26 Jun 2015, Sebastian Moeller wrote: > Thanks for the tests, now I know what router to try next (the > edgerouterX, which I had eyed as a replacement for the shaper in the > wndr3700 tops out at 130K packets per second and hence will not really > work that well for a 100/40 Mbps link). I did some more tests and it seems with SQM at 500 megabit/s I start to lose packets at around 250-300k PPS. At these speeds, the rrul_be test is "only" 85k PPS at 500 megabit/s bidirectional with large packets. Also, I have an Edgerouter ER-5, but as soon as it does CPU based forwarding it's really weak, easily under 100 megabit/s even with large packets. OpenVPN without encryption is less than 20 megabit/s. Btw, the WRT1200AC is now becoming more widely available and it's 150 EUR incl 25% VAT and shipping here in Sweden now. Btw, I tried WNDR3800 setting it to 100/100 SQM. It seems to max out around 25-30k PPS, but the difference is that when the CPU is full, it seems to delay/ECN-mark packets because there are no packets lost. When the WRT1200AC runs out of CPU it starts dropping packets. I always have 0 packets lost with the WNDR3800 when doing iperf3 testing. I found this difference interesting, wonder where in the forwarding path the WRT1200AC loses packets? -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se