Begin forwarded message:
> > > > On 14 Aug 2013, at 14:31, Sebastian Moeller <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Fred, >> >> >> On Aug 14, 2013, at 14:01 , Fred Stratton <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> On 14 Aug 2013, at 12:42, Sebastian Moeller <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Fred, >>>> >>>> >>>> On Aug 13, 2013, at 21:40 , Fred Stratton <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> (apologies for wrecking the list, and introducing email addresses in >>>>> error) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Begin forwarded message >>>>>> On 13 Aug 2013, at 19:53, Sebastian Moeller <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> H Fred >>>>>>> On Aug 13, 2013, at 17:28 , Fred Stratton <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I have been experimenting with the two sets of modified sets of >>>>>>>> scripts and AQM panels. Thank you for constructing them. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks for testing... >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> To mention the string ''for ATM choose' is repeated erroneously in the >>>>>>>> extended panel. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Fixed… I will try to test whether it actually works before >>>>>>> sending the next version... >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The scripts work. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The link layer giving best results is ethernet. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What and how did you measure? Using "use HTB's private >>>>>>> mechanism for linklayer and overhead" or "Use tc's stab mechanism for >>>>>>> linklayer and overhead"? A little browsing of the kernel source makes >>>>>>> me believe that the HTB version is fully busted and will not do >>>>>>> anything at all (so I would have imagined adel atm and ethernet to >>>>>>> behave the same). I am thinking about how to test whether a link layer >>>>>>> adjustment works or not. >>>>>> >>>>>> Ein Fehler. I had both chosen. They are mutually exclusive options. 2 >>>>>> days of testing lost. Shall restart. >>>> >>>> I will try to fix the AQM scripts to make these two mutually exclusive. >>>> That said, the HTB internal implementation does not seem to work at all, >>>> so enabling both should be equivalent to just enabling stab. In my quick >>>> and dirty testing (using netsurf-wrapper, which I got working on macosx >>>> 10.8) it looks like activating both actually should work. BTW I am looking >>>> for an open netsurf server in Europe anybody any ideas? >>> >>> I am actually getting better results from htb than td-stab at present. >> >> Then I will have to test an compare the RRUL performance for >> stab-linklayeradjustments (loa), htb-lla, no-lla, no-shaping at all, at 50% >> of link rate and at say 80% of link rate and see which performs best. Alas I >> need a closer netperf 2.6.0 net server binary than the ones in NY and CA. So >> far I am failing to find a windows binary I could run on one of the machines >> in the lab… >> How do you measure currently? I would love to run the same tests to >> figure out what is up with the two loa methods. > > Netalyzr, for all its deficiencies. >> >> >>>> >>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Pinging severs whilst running Netalyzr has no effect. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Not being a native english speaker cloud you be more explicit, >>>>>>> please. Was the ping RTT affected by the concurrent netalyzr run >>>>>>> (especially up- and download testing)? Did you get netsurf-wrapper to >>>>>>> work on ubuntu? >>>>>> >>>>>> You did not understand because I explained what I did, and I did the >>>>>> wrong thing. >>>>>> >>>>>> Not done properly. Will retry. Netsurf-wrapper will not compile. I am >>>>>> going to move to a more recent version of Ubuntu. >>>> >>>> Interesting, I managed to install it under 64bit Ubuntu 12.04 in a >>>> virtual machine, using the packages Toke supplied. I just added >>>> http://archive.tohojo.dk/ to "Software Sources" in "Update Manager" than I >>>> could use the "Synaptic Package Manager" to install netperf and >>>> netperf-wrapper from Toke's repository; so I guess no ned to compile >>>> anything. (Under maces however installing netsurf-wrapper was slightly >>>> more involved as the recommended way via pip did not work, so I had to >>>> download the netperf-wrapper repository from >>>> https://github.com/tohojo/netperf-wrapper and the cd into the downloaded >>>> directory and issue "sudo python2.7 ./setup.py install" there and I had to >>>> symplink python2.7 to python2, but after that it also worked). >>>> Just as a illustration what to expect, please find attached the RRUL >>>> results with stab based AQM und without any AQM; clearly fq_codel improves >>>> the ping RTTs a lot, so AQM works. Alas, I did not repeat this test with >>>> shaping enabled but no link layer adjustments or with the HTB link layer >>>> adjustments, so can not really tell, whether RRUL is sensitive enough to >>>> show the effects of link layer adjustments or not (my bet is on not as >>>> RRUL in my understanding uses large packets while the ATM quantization >>>> effects are strongest for small packets). I might try to do this tonight >>>> or when I get around to do it… >>>> I would be really curious to see such plots from your setup for >>>> comparison. >>> >>> Will try your suggestion for Ubuntu. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> <figure_5.png><figure_6_like_5_noAQM.png> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The tone buckets of the phone signal are translated into ATM packets >>>>>>>> by the DSP in the 2 Wire 2700. I have no idea what this closed source >>>>>>>> BSD implementation does to the packets before they are sent to CeroWRT. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I am using 3.10.2-1, as I cannot get the latest version to install >>>>>>>> with sys upgrade. >>>>>> >>>>>> I was trying 3.10.5-1 >>>> >>>> Ah, good, I might try 3.10.6-1 then directly in tftp mode. Does anyone >>>> know how much time I have between releasing the reset button and starting >>>> the tftp transfer? >>>> >>> sys upgrade does not work with the latest build. If you have to press the >>> recovery button during restart, I cannot se tftp. Does anyone know of >>> programmatic alternatives? >> >> Ah, then is is going to be TFTP I guess. What do you mean by "If you >> have to press the recovery button during restart, I cannot se tftp"? Does >> the "reboot-with-reset-button-pressed" not work after a failed sys upgrade? > > I cannot press the reset button whilst restart in the router. The procedure > works, but I cannot do it. I am looking for an alternative. There will be a > programmatic approach to enter kernel mode. >> >> Best Regards >> Sebastian >> >> >>>> Best >>>> Sebastian >>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> DT has taken to stealth with his releases. >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So 3.10.6-1 fails with sysupgrade? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> best >>>>>>> Sebastian >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list >>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel >> > _______________________________________________ Cerowrt-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
