From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ej1-x634.google.com (mail-ej1-x634.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::634]) (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 7D6FA3B29D for ; Tue, 13 Sep 2022 11:40:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-ej1-x634.google.com with SMTP id bj12so28383727ejb.13 for ; Tue, 13 Sep 2022 08:40:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date; bh=PYnabhQ4/ZGSmAT0VkCrAZXx5QMFKdkG7FEJ7C77zEU=; b=CgPdOQghoDmovo06JprpHZ0CPEG01/uPCQZV1X3rip/VtPUeP71FSIfNFBDNwXvs8g XQxRttEU99htuxbvco8uVuoYw2vn9bzE6Eeb6gPmpZlHawUjT4sMMv4U30FzXgD7Keqv fU9AATn93gD9AhEfgxCT7IBudipCcHH0niGpSDp5cixQk/R0Pg2NJt7MawFCOI3cxriM 9msm3ovY8HGauQkLQGgWll0FeSOkHMZx3h7ai5TvRPDiBQNKC8sj0lJ9CT62WqzSZ2un sCDvUey/+jWBdyGHLH3+nlTMo/RlE8yY+B9w1oX4nY5Wt3S3a+uTjR7wFuYpwPSf46j4 zWzQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date; bh=PYnabhQ4/ZGSmAT0VkCrAZXx5QMFKdkG7FEJ7C77zEU=; b=4OE4otFeHox8nWjmbLict6uqpUNkD3i7wXSX+YIoIgnocmKyThwRETIgBSl6ioV0Ov fe1XqVnkOlcmcxrt3xKGHyKUyDOjlOBLAHi1NsZ6hkQpt28w5UNTrDTbrg6u2VzTMYuT xTtxi0SmokpqiHwWCHAzgY3bkxddhAAXOWGHlJL31zK+xB9N19NBpKTLBN9jUYVpM7D4 XR3KTvSdnwyNkqlINKyH/haS5Iewc13bdi9YEoRZDsypvQ9PhFujPgkQaimxRqh1Po9m HmQWXceDQ5ox06iHAPv7ykDvLEB7UdPmrOoYPmiW4Ip91LLFWxmydXmoAETtpxgggULj MTOA== X-Gm-Message-State: ACgBeo23WlxD1PakymqiOJ+Kqnp9wGjNy1OaNfjwq9omAd6+6eKaIWo3 aZsvT7tLrBqlB09MbwWBWulEMBAjUwWmuXYfUsw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA6agR41DvR5KNS1sGiRCNL1cW6QIfErIA9EQkQ6EAC7mYFlvYj9X/r8a/YwTT+H3jtEZN2Zfih+JKMYSmzqZ30og5E= X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:d91:b0:770:86d3:36e4 with SMTP id go17-20020a1709070d9100b0077086d336e4mr20659364ejc.687.1663083610220; Tue, 13 Sep 2022 08:40:10 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Dave Taht Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2022 08:39:58 -0700 Message-ID: To: Ben Greear Cc: Dave Taht via Starlink Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Starlink] RFC: Latency test case text and example report. X-BeenThere: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: "Starlink has bufferbloat. Bad." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2022 15:40:11 -0000 hey, ben, I'm curious if this test made it into TR398? Is it possible to setup some of this or parts of TR398 to run over starlink? I'm also curious as to if any commercial ax APs were testing out better than when you tested about this time last year. I've just gone through 9 months of pure hell getting openwrt's implementation of the mt76 and ath10k to multiplex a lot better, and making some forward progress again ( https://forum.openwrt.org/t/aql-and-the-ath10k-is-lovely/59002/830 ) and along the way ran into new problems with location scanning and apple's airdrop.... but I just got a batch of dismal results back from the ax210 and mt79... tell me that there's an AP shipping from someone that scales a bit better? Lie if you must... On Sun, Sep 26, 2021 at 2:59 PM Ben Greear wrote: > > I have been working on a latency test that I hope can be included in the = TR398 issue 3 > document. It is based somewhat on Toke's paper on buffer bloat and laten= cy testing, > with a notable change that I'm doing this on 32 stations in part of the t= est. > > I implemented this test case, and an example run against an enterprise gr= ade AX AP > is here. There could still be bugs in my implementation, but I think it = is at least > close to correct: > > http://www.candelatech.com/examples/tr398v3-latency-report.pdf > > TLDR: Runs OK with single station, but sees 1+second one-way latency wit= h 32 stations and high load, and UDP often > is not able to see any throughput at all, I guess due to too many pack= ets being lost > or something. I hope to run against some cutting-edge OpenWRT APs soo= n. > > One note on TCP Latency: This is time to transmit a 64k chunk of data ov= er TCP, not a single > frame. > > My testbed used 32 Intel ax210 radios as stations in this test. > > I am interested in feedback from this list if anyone has opinions. > > Here is text of the test case: > > The Latency test intends to verify latency under low, high, and maximum A= P traffic load, with > 1 and 32 stations. Traffic load is 4 bi-directional TCP streams for each = station, plus a > low speed UDP connection to probe latency. > > Test Procedure > > DUT should be configured for 20Mhz on 2.4Ghz and 80Mhz on 5Ghz and statio= ns should use > two spatial streams. > > 1: For each combination of: 2.4Ghz N, 5Ghz AC, 2.4Ghz AX, 5Ghz AX: > > 2: Configure attenuators to emulate 2-meter distance between stations and= AP. > > 3: Create 32 stations and allow one to associate with the DUT. The other= 31 are admin-down. > > 4: Create AP to Station (download) TCP stream, and run for 120 seconds, r= ecoard > throughput as 'maximum_load'. Stop this connection. > > 5: Calculate offered_load as 1% of maximum_load. > > 6: Create 4 TCP streams on each active station, each configured for Uploa= d and Download rate of > offered_load / (4 * active_station_count * 2). > > 6: Create 1 UDP stream on each active station, configured for 56kbps traf= fic Upload and 56kbps traffic Download. > > 7: Start all TCP and UDP connections. Wait 30 seconds to let traffic set= tle. > > 8: Every 10 seconds for 120 seconds, record one-way download latency over= the last 10 seconds for each UDP connection. Depending on test > equipment features, this may mean you need to start/stop the UDP ever= y 10 seconds or clear the UDP connection > counters. > > 9: Calculate offered_load as 70% of maximum_load, and repeat steps 6 - 9 = inclusive. > > 10: Calculate offered_load as 125% of maximum_load, and repeat steps 6 - = 9 inclusive. > > 11: Allow the other 31 stations to associate, and repeat steps 5 - 11 inc= lusive with all 32 stations active. > > > Pass/Fail Criteria > > 1: For each test configuration running at 1% of maximum load: Average of= all UDP latency samples must be less than 10ms. > 2: For each test configuration running at 1% of maximum load: Maximum of= all UDP latency samples must be less than 20ms. > 3: For each test configuration running at 70% of maximum load: Average o= f all UDP latency samples must be less than 20ms. > 4: For each test configuration running at 70% of maximum load: Maximum o= f all UDP latency samples must be less than 40ms. > 5: For each test configuration running at 125% of maximum load: Average = of all UDP latency samples must be less than 50ms. > 6: For each test configuration running at 125% of maximum load: Maximum = of all UDP latency samples must be less than 100ms. > 7: For each test configuration: Each UDP connection upload throughput mus= t be at least 1/2 of requested UDP speed for final 10-second test interval. > 8: For each test configuration: Each UDP connection download throughput m= ust be at least 1/2 of requested UDP speed for final 10-second test interva= l. > > > -- > Ben Greear > Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com > _______________________________________________ > Starlink mailing list > Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink --=20 FQ World Domination pending: https://blog.cerowrt.org/post/state_of_fq_code= l/ Dave T=C3=A4ht CEO, TekLibre, LLC