revolutions per minute - a new metric for measuring responsiveness
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>
To: Christoph Paasch <cpaasch@apple.com>,
	Christoph Paasch via Rpm <rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net>,
	"jf@jonathanfoulkes.com" <jf@jonathanfoulkes.com>
Cc: Rpm <rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: [Rpm] Changes to RPM calculation for MacOS Ventura?
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2022 23:09:15 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <E74B7BBC-12A8-4546-8A97-1D2112AFA86A@gmx.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <EAC1394A-3C0C-497F-A0F9-D8B42611FD97@apple.com>

Hi Christoph,

On 1 November 2022 22:52:21 CET, Christoph Paasch via Rpm <rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
>Hello Jonathan,
>
>> On Oct 28, 2022, at 2:45 PM, jf--- via Rpm <rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
>> 
>> Hopefully, Christoph can provide some details on the changes from the prior networkQuality test, as we’re seeing some pretty large changes in results for the latest RPM tests.
>> 
>> Where before we’d see results in the >1,500 RPM (and multiple >2,000 RPM results) for a DOCSIS 3.1 line with QoS enabled (180 down/35 up), it now returns peak download RPM of ~600 and ~800 for upload.
>> 
>> latest results:
>> 
>> ==== SUMMARY ====
>> Uplink capacity: 25.480 Mbps (Accuracy: High)
>> Downlink capacity: 137.768 Mbps (Accuracy: High)
>> Uplink Responsiveness: Medium (385 RPM) (Accuracy: High)
>> Downlink Responsiveness: Medium (376 RPM) (Accuracy: High)
>> Idle Latency: 43.875 milli-seconds (Accuracy: High)
>> Interface: en8
>> Uplink bytes transferred: 35.015 MB
>> Downlink bytes transferred: 154.649 MB
>> Uplink Flow count: 16
>> Downlink Flow count: 12
>> Start: 10/28/22, 5:12:30 PM
>> End: 10/28/22, 5:12:54 PM
>> OS Version: Version 13.0 (Build 22A380)
>> 
>> Latencies (as monitored via PingPlotter) stay absolutely steady during these tests,
>> 
>> So unless my ISP coincidentally started having major service issues, I’m scratching my head as to why.
>> 
>> For contrast, the Ookla result is as follows: https://www.speedtest.net/result/13865976456  with 15ms down, 18ms up loaded latencies.
>
>In Ventura, we started adding the latency on the load-generating connections to the final RPM-calulcation as well. The formula being used is now exactly what is in the v01 IETF draft.

[SM] I have been wondering quietly before whether reporting both inter- and intra-load-bearing flow responsiveness would not be a cool option for verbose mode? Both IMHO are giving relevant information about a link's usability under working conditions.

Regards
        Sebastian


>
>Very likely the bottleneck in your network does FQ, and so latency on separate connections is very low, while your load-generating connections are still bufferbloated.
>
>
>Ookla measures latency only on separate connections, thus will also be heavily impacted by FQ.
>
>
>Does that clarify it?
>
>
>Cheers,
>Christoph 
>
>
>> 
>> Further machine details: MacBook Pro 16” (2019) using a USB-C to Ethernet adapter.
>> I run with full ECN enabled:
>> sudo sysctl -w net.inet.tcp.disable_tcp_heuristics=1 
>> 
>> sudo sysctl -w net.inet.tcp.ecn_initiate_out=1
>> 
>> sudo sysctl -w net.inet.tcp.ecn_negotiate_in=1
>> 
>> and also with instant ack replies:
>> 
>> sysctl net.inet.tcp.delayed_ack
>> net.inet.tcp.delayed_ack: 0
>> 
>> I did try with delayed_ack=1, and the results were about the same.
>> 
>> Thanks in advance,
>> 
>> Jonathan Foulkes
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Rpm mailing list
>> Rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net
>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/rpm
>

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

  reply	other threads:[~2022-11-01 22:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-10-28 21:45 jf
2022-10-29 16:53 ` Sebastian Moeller
2022-11-01 21:52 ` Christoph Paasch
2022-11-01 22:09   ` Sebastian Moeller [this message]
2022-11-10 19:52     ` Christoph Paasch
2022-11-03 22:09   ` jf
2022-11-04 20:50     ` jf
2022-11-10 20:41       ` Christoph Paasch
2022-11-10 20:28     ` Christoph Paasch
2022-11-10 20:59       ` rjmcmahon

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: https://lists.bufferbloat.net/postorius/lists/rpm.lists.bufferbloat.net/

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=E74B7BBC-12A8-4546-8A97-1D2112AFA86A@gmx.de \
    --to=moeller0@gmx.de \
    --cc=cpaasch@apple.com \
    --cc=jf@jonathanfoulkes.com \
    --cc=rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox