From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.19]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mout.gmx.net", Issuer "TeleSec ServerPass DE-1" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE8FA21F378 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2015 10:42:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from srichardlxp2 ([46.245.200.65]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx002) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LjqLx-1XpVe71kWP-00boxI; Thu, 26 Feb 2015 19:42:10 +0100 Message-ID: <5EDCCC18D27F4F039FA971B3C834A466@srichardlxp2> From: "Richard Scheffenegger" To: "divya singla" , References: Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 19:32:58 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00B5_01D051FB.06FDEC90" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157 X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:iiOl5a40VWd3H8o6TjACi5XRTV1dT6+rmyaYHTVKMgxEH/yu4gI 6NLxdxpslSlV9enoXFwqZf9cFujRfqDwJilSsALI1hQApSPa6woMe1BZb+kSWDzGr3X3j5p cdB6ktRQYfAbXhy6uJ4wZ3n8822Y4NmCLKr3yPp/02uiIRXKEyE9+MvIbVAF/unL3RhNFV4 RyZPiLCfnPo93VTuqQAZA== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1; Subject: Re: [Codel] About Packet Drop in Codel X-BeenThere: codel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: CoDel AQM discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 18:42:42 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_00B5_01D051FB.06FDEC90 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Divya, is this really the only metric that you are interested in? What kind of topology and traffic pattern are you using? I would suggest = to read the recent posts by Dave Taht around this topic (perhaps looking = into ns-3, as the more modern simulator, featuring RRUL test), and also = not focus too much on packet loss. I would think, that the average and induced latency your RED TCP = sessions are expiriencing were higher than those governed by CoDel? What was the effective goodput, and the utilization of your bottleneck = link? Qualitatively - I'd expect slightly sooner, and sometimes (within an RTT = - so not much problem for TCP CC) more losses with Codel (depending = where they happen) in order for it to get induced latency under control. = But quantitatively, the losses shouldn't be orders of magnitude more, = only so much to have a well running control loop there. Best regards, Richard ----- Original Message -----=20 From: divya singla=20 To: codel@lists.bufferbloat.net=20 Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 6:12 PM Subject: [Codel] About Packet Drop in Codel Hi Members, i am doing M.tech and my research topic is AQM. i tried to run codel with ns-2.35. And i found packet loss is more in codel as compared to RED. is there anybody who also thinks the same or is it in my case only? Am i doing something wrong? -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- _______________________________________________ Codel mailing list Codel@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/codel ------=_NextPart_000_00B5_01D051FB.06FDEC90 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =EF=BB=BF
Hi Divya,
 
is this really the only metric that you = are=20 interested in?
 
What kind of topology and traffic = pattern are you=20 using? I would suggest to read the recent posts by Dave Taht around this = topic=20 (perhaps looking into ns-3, as the more modern simulator, featuring RRUL = test),=20 and also not focus too much on packet loss.
 
 
I would think, that the average and=20 induced latency your RED TCP sessions are expiriencing were higher = than=20 those governed by CoDel?
 
What was the effective goodput, and the = utilization=20 of  your bottleneck link?
 
Qualitatively - I'd expect slightly = sooner, and=20 sometimes (within an RTT - so not much problem for TCP CC) more losses = with=20 Codel (depending where they happen) in order for it to get induced = latency under=20 control. But quantitatively, the losses shouldn't be orders of magnitude = more,=20 only so much to have a well running control loop there.
 
Best regards,
  Richard
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 divya singla
Sent: Thursday, February 26, = 2015 6:12=20 PM
Subject: [Codel] About Packet = Drop in=20 Codel

Hi Members,
i am doing M.tech and my research topic is AQM.
i tried to run codel with ns-2.35.
And i found packet loss is more in codel as compared to = RED.
is there anybody who also thinks the same or is it in my case = only?
Am i doing something wrong?

_______________________________________________
Codel = mailing=20 list
Codel@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.buffe= rbloat.net/listinfo/codel
------=_NextPart_000_00B5_01D051FB.06FDEC90--