[Bloat] [Rpm] the grinch meets cloudflare's christmas present

jf at jonathanfoulkes.com jf at jonathanfoulkes.com
Wed Jan 4 14:20:15 EST 2023

HNY Dave and all the rest,

Great to see yet another capacity test add latency metrics to the results. This one looks like a good start.

Results from my Windstream DOCSIS 3.1 line (3.1 on download only, up is 3.0) Gigabit down / 35Mbps up provisioning. Using an IQrouter Pro (an i5 x86) with Cake set for 710/31 as this ISP can’t deliver reliable low-latency unless you shave a good bit off the targets. My local loop is pretty congested.

Here’s the latest Cloudflare test:

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: CFSpeedTest_Gig35_20230104.png
Type: image/png
Size: 379539 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/bloat/attachments/20230104/d89867fe/attachment-0002.png>
-------------- next part --------------

And an Ookla test run just afterward:

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Speedtest_net_Gig35_20230104.png
Type: image/png
Size: 40589 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/bloat/attachments/20230104/d89867fe/attachment-0003.png>
-------------- next part --------------

They are definitely both in the ballpark and correspond to other tests run from the router itself or my (wired) MacBook Pro.



> On Jan 4, 2023, at 12:26 PM, Dave Taht via Rpm <rpm at lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
> Please try the new, the shiny, the really wonderful test here:
> https://speed.cloudflare.com/
> I would really appreciate some independent verification of
> measurements using this tool. In my brief experiments it appears - as
> all the commercial tools to date - to dramatically understate the
> bufferbloat, on my LTE, (and my starlink terminal is out being
> hacked^H^H^H^H^H^Hworked on, so I can't measure that)
> My test of their test reports 223ms 5G latency under load , where
> flent reports over 2seconds. See comparison attached.
> My guess is that this otherwise lovely new  tool, like too many,
> doesn't run for long enough. Admittedly, most web objects (their
> target market) are small, and so long as they remain small and not
> heavily pipelined this test is a very good start... but I'm pretty
> sure cloudflare is used for bigger uploads and downloads than that.
> There's no way to change the test to run longer either.
> I'd love to get some results from other networks (compared as usual to
> flent), especially ones with cake on it. I'd love to know if they
> measured more minimum rtts that can be obtained with fq_codel or cake,
> correctly.
> Love Always,
> The Grinch
> -- 
> This song goes out to all the folk that thought Stadia would work:
> https://www.linkedin.com/posts/dtaht_the-mushroom-song-activity-6981366665607352320-FXtz
> Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC
> <image.png><tcp_nup-2023-01-04T090937.211620.LTE.flent.gz>_______________________________________________
> Rpm mailing list
> Rpm at lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/rpm

More information about the Bloat mailing list