From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-yw0-x22c.google.com (mail-yw0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::22c]) (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 B34A63B260 for ; Thu, 5 May 2016 22:08:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-yw0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id o66so177344902ywc.3 for ; Thu, 05 May 2016 19:08:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to; bh=sIqASFlK+g7Cq9UKTvdAgaEU0lsFSMyN5DqjvW4amFA=; b=QA/B1XkN+vVG0zwMbHTrV/Q8sqeXPBA04YzqU84XT4cDTkMVClgm258m8CoU41exJF lRbmYHYkT3UkD1eXQl5QVNQMD1SH8EPJFzbyx2nbPQctVwgTAt/ob7LVAppijmk+gFoi c0fU7UsF790qBNJ+M7/Ym1Xz4tyLIp9TkzLNzMQ5QbZTcRg9mqSLotD4puYhl6zRdxgd T1hdDt907cu4JqMBndTgzAD6qEJQoLKvKdL6HPzV5jImdTTC/YlUd9izZh+jVDPjx+F0 FE5QtMNViy+Y/Olijq3rTvM6of0xlDeHntJsqdeNoKVltGzJgOlnjDTrROVSYJ0PvZkk a0HQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to; bh=sIqASFlK+g7Cq9UKTvdAgaEU0lsFSMyN5DqjvW4amFA=; b=dg4f9muCgOxTceaydUL+oCbZi/kcEcUUoxP42wnatM32GxrXH0A1oNA4eMqJmVmmN/ MsbCw7Jwzo3nzNAhbnLyxVaiqxdqzYgQLwKLY8Jm4+iKSFc20AnqAiUwaA6rgkICXDHe kwD5YIqzlTnrh1y9gOOlm+AB6lQoMMMpOC7lnGlIrED2OY/jtlCz/wMkRmbWeO1kc9sY G2mn+cw3Jm5zEQUgbFG3D5A80zWOSXRHh/JSp1muVZZIUyIfUg3kMM1cK63W6hwM+SGR +KEcN5T3Ev8OXr7R7WqxXi8KTkOKMG5Gms8dK8aehRtiaWLq86l55XEGrNvPxU8rhUck t3/g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FX4ZFaZq+0m2FIAR3GS3kgq53XW4BbbIFQ6we2chDxEJ4zpBNAGgLiFmQtaAFzaMrB7d62fpmOZNCLJAA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.176.2.65 with SMTP id 59mr11190343uas.16.1462500526901; Thu, 05 May 2016 19:08:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.103.44.70 with HTTP; Thu, 5 May 2016 19:08:46 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 5 May 2016 19:08:46 -0700 Message-ID: From: Aaron Wood To: make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113c01d063d1fa053222f0ba Subject: [Make-wifi-fast] QoS and test setups X-BeenThere: make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 May 2016 02:08:47 -0000 --001a113c01d063d1fa053222f0ba Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 I saw Dave's tests on WMM vs. without, and started thinking about test setups for systems when QoS is in use (using classification, not just SQM/AQM). There are a LOT of assumptions made when QoS systems based on marked packets is used: - That traffic X can starve others - That traffic X is more/most important Our test tools are not particularly good at anything other than hammering the network (UDP or TCP). At least TCP has a built-in congestion control. I've seen many UDP (or even raw IP) test setups that didn't look anything like "real" traffic. I know Dave has wanted an isochronous traffic tool that could simulate voip traffic (with in-band one-way latency/jitter/loss measurement capabilities). What other tools do we need, for replicating traffic types that match how these QoS types in wifi are meant to be used? I think we're doing an excellent job of showing how they can be abused. Abusing is pretty easy, at this point (rrul, iPerf, etc). -Aaron Wood --001a113c01d063d1fa053222f0ba Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I saw Dave's tests on WMM vs. without, and started thi= nking about test setups for systems when QoS is in use (using classificatio= n, not just SQM/AQM).

There are a LOT of assumptions mad= e when QoS systems based on marked packets is used:

- That traffic X can starve others
- That traffic X is more/mos= t important

Our test tools are not particularly go= od at anything other than hammering the network (UDP or TCP).=C2=A0 At leas= t TCP has a built-in congestion control.=C2=A0 I've seen many UDP (or e= ven raw IP) test setups that didn't look anything like "real"= traffic.

I know Dave has wanted an isochronous tr= affic tool that could simulate voip traffic (with in-band one-way latency/j= itter/loss measurement capabilities). =C2=A0

What = other tools do we need, for replicating traffic types that match how these = QoS types in wifi are meant to be used?=C2=A0 I think we're doing an ex= cellent job of showing how they can be abused.=C2=A0 Abusing is pretty easy= , at this point (rrul, iPerf, etc).

-Aaron Wood
--001a113c01d063d1fa053222f0ba--