[Cerowrt-devel] Routing limit question
Sebastian Moeller
moeller0 at gmx.de
Mon Oct 20 04:11:31 EDT 2014
Hi Ernesto,
On Oct 20, 2014, at 03:08 , Ernesto Elias <ernestogelias at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Well Sebastian sir, I am taking your advice and I'm on windows 7 so right now I'm downloading virtualbox and xubuntu. I don't know if there is one that you guys recommend.
I only tested ubuntu 12.04LTS, but certainly I would try the current 14.07 LTS today.
> Well... I am new to all this stuff so I'm asking you to please help me on the subject like after everything is up and running on the computer,
Oh, sure I am happy to help you with getting better data ;)
> what other steps do I do afterwards and forgive me like I said I'm new ot all this stuff because I want to be able to find my link capacity when using SQM. and Thanks for the help!
First step is getting the vitalized linux up and running, then python 2.7 (I assume that python will be part of the distribution), with matplotlib; and finally netperf-wrapper. I assume it might take a bit trying to figure out all the required packets installed, but it should be reasonably quick to get this up and running… Just give it a try and let me know if/where you get stuck
It would be most excellent if you could document the whole procedure somehow so we could put it somewhere on the net to make it easier in the future...
Best Regards
Sebastian
>
> On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 3:55 PM, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0 at gmx.de> wrote:
> Hi Ernesto,
>
> I would recommend to not run the netperf processes on the router you want to assess, if possible. Shaping at the rates you are interested in probably will take 100% CPU of the router, so there is no slack for running net server and netperf instances at the same time. Also I would recommend to use netperf-wrapper (https://github.com/tohojo/netperf-wrapper) instead of netperfrunner.sh as it allows so much nicer visualization of the queueing over time. netperfrunner.sh is great tool for quick testing and figuring out link capacities and worst case latency under load increase (LULI), but for more thorough comparisons it ain’t made. Netperf-wrapper will run under linux and macosx natively, but will also run (well enough) in a linux virtual machine on a windows box.
>
>
> Best Regards
> Sebastian
>
>
> On Oct 19, 2014, at 21:16 , Ernesto Elias <ernestogelias at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > root at cerowrt:~# /usr/lib/CeroWrtScripts/netperfrunner.sh
> > 2014-10-19 15:10:27 Testing netperf.bufferbloat.net (ipv4) with 4 streams down a nd up while pinging gstatic.com. Takes about 60 seconds.
> > Download: 30.49 Mbps
> > Upload: 46.52 Mbps
> > Latency: (in msec, 61 pings, 0.00% packet loss)
> > Min: 19.848
> > 10pct: 19.958
> > Median: 20.743
> > Avg: 21.229
> > 90pct: 22.739
> > Max: 30.491
> > root at cerowrt:~# /usr/lib/CeroWrtScripts/netperfrunner.sh
> > 2014-10-19 15:11:54 Testing netperf.bufferbloat.net (ipv4) with 4 streams down a nd up while pinging gstatic.com. Takes about 60 seconds.
> > Download: 7.02 Mbps
> > Upload: 63.68 Mbps
> > Latency: (in msec, 61 pings, 0.00% packet loss)
> > Min: 21.690
> > 10pct: 117.997
> > Median: 153.983
> > Avg: 150.851
> > 90pct: 180.777
> > Max: 190.265
> >
> >
> > The first result i gotten by only shaping the uplink and the second results are for only shaping the downlink...
> >
> > and for the testing i put 0 on the for the downlink and uplink when I was testing for the opposite. and I put 50000 in it when I was shaping it for the test. Am I doing it right ?
> >
> > On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Dave Taht <dave.taht at gmail.com> wrote:
> > shape the download only, then measure. shape the upload only, then measure.
> >
> > On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 11:48 AM, Ernesto Elias <ernestogelias at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Oh OK I mean I was just wondering because I was trying to figure out what
> > > should I have put in the sqm tab because I saw that the wndr3800 tops out at
> > > 50 mbit combined of download and upload right? As of now I have it at 25/25
> > > on the page. Is that right or should I just shape the upload?
> > >
> > > On Oct 19, 2014 2:24 PM, "Dave Taht" <dave.taht at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On at least one verizon device I've tried it appeared that they had
> > >> SFQ or something similar on egress from the modem.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> http://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/codel/wiki/RRUL_Rogues_Gallery#Verizon-FIOS-Testing-at-25Mbit-up-and-25Mbit-down
> > >>
> > >> So you only needed to shape the download. which is good as we start
> > >> peaking out at 50Mbit download total. But only measurements can tell.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 10:51 AM, Ernesto Elias <ernestogelias at gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >> > Hello everyone!
> > >> > I have a question about the wndr3800 routing limit. I went back to the
> > >> > older
> > >> > submissions to see if I can find what would be the answer for it. But in
> > >> > my
> > >> > search I haven't managed to find a definite answer. From what I seen
> > >> > about
> > >> > setting the limit it can do with SQM is 50, 60, or 80 mbit. I'm just
> > >> > wondering if anyone can shed some light for me here as I have verizon
> > >> > fios
> > >> > and my speeds are 50 dl/50 ul. Thank you guys very much!
> > >> >
> > >> > _______________________________________________
> > >> > Cerowrt-devel mailing list
> > >> > Cerowrt-devel at lists.bufferbloat.net
> > >> > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Dave Täht
> > >>
> > >> thttp://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/bloat/wiki/Upcoming_Talks
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Dave Täht
> >
> > thttp://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/bloat/wiki/Upcoming_Talks
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Cerowrt-devel mailing list
> > Cerowrt-devel at lists.bufferbloat.net
> > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>
>
More information about the Cerowrt-devel
mailing list