[Cerowrt-devel] 3.10.36-1 dev build released
Chuck Anderson
cra at WPI.EDU
Sun Apr 6 00:48:23 EDT 2014
On Sat, Apr 05, 2014 at 05:57:44PM -0700, Dave Taht wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Chuck Anderson <cra at wpi.edu> wrote:
> > And IPv6 over the HE tunnel:
> >
> > root at cerowrt:~# sh betterspeedtest.sh -H netperf6.richb-hanover.com
> > Testing against netperf6.richb-hanover.com while pinging gstatic.com (60 seconds in each direction)
> > ............................................................................
> > Download: 21.56 Mbps
> > Latency: (in msec, 77 pings, 0.00% packet loss)
> > Min: 14.477
> > 10pct: 15.469
> > Median: 17.646
> > Avg: 18.906
> > 90pct: 23.540
> > Max: 36.302
> > ............................................................................
> > Upload: 5.85 Mbps
> > Latency: (in msec, 76 pings, 0.00% packet loss)
> > Min: 14.589
> > 10pct: 15.579
> > Median: 18.156
> > Avg: 18.323
> > 90pct: 21.192
> > Max: 25.282
>
> That's pretty lame compared to your ipv4 results, but the length of
> the path looks the same... puzzling... How much further (or less far)
> is rich's box (traceroute6 -n netperf6.richb-hanover.com) on ipv6 vs
> ipv4 (traceroute -n )
Without any testing going on:
My traceroute [v0.82]
a (::) Sun Apr 6 00:35:55 2014
Keys: Help Display mode Restart statistics Order of fields quit
Packets Pings
Host Loss% Snt Last Avg Best Wrst StDev
1. 2001:470:89c6:3::1 0.0% 25 1.7 1.7 1.4 3.4 0.4
2. canderson-2.tunnel.tserv4.nyc4.i 0.0% 25 25.3 22.5 20.6 27.6 1.5
3. ge3-8.core1.nyc4.he.net 0.0% 25 17.2 21.1 16.0 37.6 5.3
4. 100ge5-1.core1.ash1.he.net 0.0% 25 25.2 25.7 21.4 34.9 3.7
5. xe-0.equinix.asbnva01.us.bb.gin. 33.3% 25 32.7 25.1 22.2 32.7 2.7
6. ae-6.r20.asbnva02.us.bb.gin.ntt. 0.0% 25 24.0 27.3 22.5 41.3 5.0
7. ae-3.r04.atlnga05.us.bb.gin.ntt. 0.0% 25 43.9 40.4 36.7 53.3 4.5
8. xe-0-1-0-17.r04.atlnga05.us.ce.g 0.0% 25 47.8 41.5 35.7 50.3 4.5
9. ???
10. 2604:180::65be:a189 0.0% 24 37.7 37.9 35.8 40.1 1.3
My traceroute [v0.82]
a (0.0.0.0) Sun Apr 6 00:37:12 2014
Keys: Help Display mode Restart statistics Order of fields quit
Packets Pings
Host Loss% Snt Last Avg Best Wrst StDev
1. 172.30.42.65 0.0% 26 1.5 1.6 1.3 5.7 0.8
2. ???
3. te-0-0-0-11-sur02.woburn.ma.bost 0.0% 25 25.1 11.0 8.8 25.1 3.4
4. be-62-ar01.needham.ma.boston.com 0.0% 25 87.9 65.4 10.4 684.5 168.8
5. he-2-7-0-0-cr01.newyork.ny.ibone 0.0% 25 15.7 19.9 15.7 27.6 2.9
6. ???
7. ae3.nyc32.ip4.tinet.net 0.0% 25 28.6 23.2 16.0 49.7 9.1
8. xe-4-3-0.atl11.ip4.tinet.net 0.0% 25 50.3 49.3 46.4 66.2 4.7
9. ramnode-gw.ip4.tinet.net 0.0% 25 47.0 50.9 46.8 58.7 3.8
10. ???
11. 23.226.232.80 0.0% 25 47.8 48.6 46.8 57.2 2.2
>
> I have certainly seen bottlenecks, excessive delay, and packet loss on
> he's gateways.
>
> An "mtr" might be revealing during the test for spotting packet loss
> further on the path.
SQM is now set to 60000/10000.
During the IPv6 test:
My traceroute [v0.82]
a (::) Sun Apr 6 00:41:12 2014
Keys: Help Display mode Restart statistics Order of fields quit
Packets Pings
Host Loss% Snt Last Avg Best Wrst StDev
1. 2001:470:89c6:3::1 0.0% 138 2.7 1.8 1.2 17.7 1.4
2. canderson-2.tunnel.tserv4.nyc4.i 0.0% 138 22.9 25.2 20.0 62.9 5.2
3. ge3-8.core1.nyc4.he.net 0.0% 137 22.5 25.0 16.2 143.6 11.9
4. 100ge5-1.core1.ash1.he.net 0.0% 137 22.6 29.0 21.2 72.7 7.1
5. xe-0.equinix.asbnva01.us.bb.gin. 40.1% 137 25.7 31.1 22.4 147.9 16.6
6. ae-6.r20.asbnva02.us.bb.gin.ntt. 0.0% 137 22.9 29.5 22.1 72.0 8.2
7. ae-3.r04.atlnga05.us.bb.gin.ntt. 11.7% 137 37.1 41.4 36.2 74.5 5.4
8. xe-0-1-0-17.r04.atlnga05.us.ce.g 0.0% 137 39.9 43.6 35.8 79.9 6.8
9. ???
10. 2604:180::65be:a189 0.0% 137 36.6 41.1 36.0 59.8 4.5
root at cerowrt:~# sh betterspeedtest.sh -H netperf6.richb-hanover.com
Testing against netperf6.richb-hanover.com while pinging gstatic.com (60 seconds in each direction)
..........................................................................
Download: 27.2 Mbps
Latency: (in msec, 76 pings, 0.00% packet loss)
Min: 14.666
10pct: 15.606
Median: 18.254
Avg: 21.101
90pct: 29.038
Max: 55.143
...........................................................................
Upload: 6.57 Mbps
Latency: (in msec, 76 pings, 0.00% packet loss)
Min: 14.753
10pct: 15.233
Median: 17.599
Avg: 17.591
90pct: 19.674
Max: 24.718
IPv4 test:
root at cerowrt:~# sh betterspeedtest.sh
Testing against netperf.richb-hanover.com while pinging gstatic.com (60 seconds in each direction)
............................................................
Download: 46.11 Mbps
Latency: (in msec, 61 pings, 0.00% packet loss)
Min: 16.011
10pct: 16.463
Median: 19.134
Avg: 19.743
90pct: 22.525
Max: 28.650
............................................................
. Upload: 8.97 Mbps
Latency: (in msec, 61 pings, 0.00% packet loss)
Min: 16.214
10pct: 16.904
Median: 19.154
Avg: 19.151
90pct: 20.989
Max: 22.683
> > On Sat, Apr 05, 2014 at 08:02:37PM -0400, Chuck Anderson wrote:
> >> Here are some betterspeedtest.sh results for 3.10.36-1:
> >>
> >> First, without SQM enabled:
> >>
> >> root at cerowrt:~# sh betterspeedtest.sh
> >> Testing against netperf.richb-hanover.com while pinging gstatic.com (60 seconds in each direction)
> >> ............................................................
> >> Download: 52.39 Mbps
> >> Latency: (in msec, 61 pings, 0.00% packet loss)
> >> Min: 15.281
> >> 10pct: 18.302
> >> Median: 28.502
> >> Avg: 32.891
> >> 90pct: 56.776
> >> Max: 74.282
> >> .............................................................
> >> Upload: 11.07 Mbps
> >> Latency: (in msec, 61 pings, 0.00% packet loss)
> >> Min: 15.341
> >> 10pct: 18.669
> >> Median: 82.480
> >> Avg: 126.662
> >> 90pct: 248.102
> >> Max: 278.644
> >>
> >> And now, with SQM set to 80% up/down numbers from above:
> >>
> >> root at cerowrt:~# sh betterspeedtest.sh
> >> Testing against netperf.richb-hanover.com while pinging gstatic.com (60 seconds in each direction)
> >> ............................................................
> >> Download: 32.84 Mbps
> >> Latency: (in msec, 61 pings, 0.00% packet loss)
> >> Min: 15.623
> >> 10pct: 16.077
> >> Median: 17.634
> >> Avg: 17.982
> >> 90pct: 19.653
> >> Max: 23.272
> >> .............................................................
> >> Upload: 8.25 Mbps
> >> Latency: (in msec, 61 pings, 0.00% packet loss)
> >> Min: 16.001
> >> 10pct: 17.623
> >> Median: 19.796
> >> Avg: 19.820
> >> 90pct: 21.716
> >> Max: 23.228
> >> root at cerowrt:~#
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sat, Apr 05, 2014 at 01:18:51PM -0700, Dave Taht wrote:
> >> > + openwrt merge
> >> > ++ fix for dhcpv6 renew problem
> >> > + actually tested for an hour so far on 5.4ghz, with a us countrycode
> >> > and wpa+psk enabled...
> >> >
> >> > Get it at:
> >> >
> >> > http://snapon.lab.bufferbloat.net/~cero2/cerowrt/wndr/3.10.36-1/
> >> >
> >> > but: there isn't much other reason to upgrade to this...
> >> >
> >> > - no progress on the wifi bug - but I am beating up wifi with a variety of
> >> > devices and scripts today hoping to make it fail, and bringing up a
> >> > bunch more tomorrow.
> >> >
> >> > - toke's script relies on stratum '16' changing, and it doesn't with openwrt's
> >> > ntp, it seems....
More information about the Cerowrt-devel
mailing list