Packet Size (bytes)      Count     Packet Size (bytes)     Count
    1 to   75:           20248      751 to  825:              31
   76 to  150:          239541      826 to  900:              28
  151 to  225:           52956      901 to  975:              35
  226 to  300:            7297      976 to 1050:              15
  301 to  375:             547     1051 to 1125:              35
  376 to  450:             385     1126 to 1200:           17657
  451 to  525:             216     1201 to 1275:             129
  526 to  600:              44     1276 to 1350:              97
  601 to  675:              36     1351 to 1425:             139
  676 to  750:              14     1426 to 1500+:           1311

This is a log of packet size from my node over a period of 20 minutes.
Actually of my 2 nodes, and probably a little TCP traffic too, but not
much.

Interesting features:

76-150-byte packets: 239451 * 100 = 23,945,100
1126-1200-byte packets: 17657 * 1150 = 20,305,550

Of the first group, 56 bytes per packet is overhead, so 13,409,256 bytes
overhead out of that 23MB - something like a quarter of the whole.

Obviously having many variable sized small packets is a bad thing for
security, but surely it is a good thing for latency to be as low as
possible by sending messages immediately?

Another interesting point: If more than half of our bandwidth usage is
on small packets, then our policy of only bandwidth limiting large
packets cannot possibly work.
-- 
Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org
Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/
ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: 
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20060406/c23cae7e/attachment.pgp>

Reply via email to