[Cerowrt-devel] firmware scanning for features?

[Dave Taht]

I imagine firmware scanning has been raised to a high art at this
point, mostly, looking for vulnerabilities, but it occurred to me this
morning that it would be possible to scan for a given feature's code
pattern (in our perpetual case, looking for fq-codel, bql, and cake),
and whether they were in by default (module loader, symbol tables,
qdisc_create_dflt). I imagine recognizable patterns, lacking a symbol
table, would include the invsqrt approximation, in cake's case the
invsqrt table, stuff that manipulates the ecn bits, and so on.

-- 
I tried to build a better future, a few times:
https://wayforward.archive.org/?site=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icei.org

Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC
___
Cerowrt-devel mailing list
Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel

[Cerowrt-devel] Fwd: [ipv6-wg] RIPE554-Bis consensus

[Dave Taht]

rfc7567 is now here where it belongs, but optional. I can live with
that. Seeing the sea of standards for ipv6 is always intimidating, not
just for how enormous the list is,
but in knowing how much it leaves out for building a truly functional product.

-- Forwarded message -
From: Jetten Raymond 
Date: Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 3:01 AM
Subject: [ipv6-wg] RIPE554-Bis consensus
To: ipv6...@ripe.net 
Cc: san...@steffann.nl , j...@go6.si ,
mer...@doubleshotsecurity.com 


Dear List members,



The time has come, to declare consensus on RIPE554-Bis

 
https://docs.google.com/document/d/10HsfHDOIhUPIvGk9WP0azJiIsMVzQ49RsqWfnbNtceI/

Big thanks to all list discussion participants, participants at the
RIPE83 IPv6 Working Group session for their input, and most of all to

Merike Käo, Jan Žorž, Sander Steffann, Tim Chown, Tim Winters for
doing a  lot of work.



I will contact the RIPE NCC shortly to get this new document published.





Raymond Jetten
Senior Technology Specialist

Production

Cloud Services, Networks and connectivity

Interconnectivity & Content

Elisa Oyj

Vuolteenkatu 2

33100 Tampere



+358 45 6700 139
raymond.jet...@elisa.fi
www.elisa.fi

Lisätietoa henkilötietojen käsittelystä ja tietosuojasta Elisalla
https://elisa.fi/tietosuoja
Mer information om Elisas hantering av personuppgifter och dataskydd
https://elisa.fi/tietosuoja
More information on personal data management and data protection at
Elisa https://elisa.com/dataprotection



*




For Internal Use Only

--

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or
change your subscription options, please visit:
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ipv6-wg


-- 
I tried to build a better future, a few times:
https://wayforward.archive.org/?site=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icei.org

Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC
___
Cerowrt-devel mailing list
Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] [Bloat] tp-link request for SQM

[Sebastian Moeller]

Hi Dave,


> On Dec 3, 2021, at 15:18, Dave Taht  wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 4:00 AM Luca Muscariello  wrote:
>> 
>> Test using a tp-link AP EAP 245
>> 
>> https://www.waveform.com/tools/bufferbloat?test-id=bbcc5ef5-e677-4f27-aa04-1849db81d0f5
> 
> Nice.
> 
> A kvetch is that I really wish they also tested up and down at the same time.
> 
> Another kvetch is I think the test needs to run longer at these speeds.
> 
> Another another kvetch is they factor in baseline latency to determine
> if the link is suitable for gaming or not.

Which is the sane thing to do... IMHO. For any "twitch"-type 
reation-time gated gaming all players need to be in an acceptable range of 
"RTTs" to and from the server so that all perceive the world similarly and 
nobody has an unfair advantage/disadvantage, so absolute RTT does seem to 
matter. I would agree that jitter is nastier in that is will cause "randomish" 
variations of the RTT, but then the known solution against jitter is additional 
buffering (large enough to simply even out the unequal jittered packet arrival 
times) which in turn just increases the "RTT", no? (I guess no game really does 
this enough, so jitter stays the constant problem for internet game-play).
> 
> We had them participating on this list at some point
> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Thu, Dec 2, 2021 at 7:48 PM Dave Taht  wrote:
>>> 
>>> tp-link, is, so far as I know, the last major home router vendor NOT
>>> shipping a SQM system. Perhaps this could be modded up with someones
>>> with accounts?
>>> 
>>> https://community.tp-link.com/us/home/forum/topic/511156
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> I tried to build a better future, a few times:
>>> https://wayforward.archive.org/?site=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icei.org
>>> 
>>> Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC
>>> ___
>>> Bloat mailing list
>>> bl...@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> I tried to build a better future, a few times:
> https://wayforward.archive.org/?site=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icei.org
> 
> Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC
> ___
> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel

___
Cerowrt-devel mailing list
Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] [Bloat] tp-link request for SQM

[Dave Taht]

On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 4:44 AM Kenneth Porter  wrote:
>
> --On Friday, December 03, 2021 12:12 PM + "Wheelock, Ian"
>  wrote:
>
> > 280Mbps service with Comcast is likely the 300/10 package offering… In
> > that case the US is limited to 10Mbps
> >
> > I understand there might be some issue if 280Mbps was being processed –
> > but in the US direction, we are not talking >>100Mbps – its about
> > 10Mbps US, I would have thought running cake on 10Mbps US cake would not
> > have triggered a 50% loss in performance even on this platform. Now if
> > cake is applied to both inbound and outbound traffic then having to deal
> > with ~280Mbps might be tough. In the case of DOCSIS AQM, PIE runs in the
> > GW only on outbound traffic.
>
> That's indeed the package. I was seeing 270-280 down and 12 up.
>
> "Good" tests without cake:
> 
> 

I'm confused, was cake on on the upload? The whole "upload under load
+0" thing I am finding a bit worrisome,
certainly at higher rates with fq on it's going to be close to 0, but
in actually finding one ONT with a mere 5ms
buffer (so far), I am fearing that a solution entering the field is
really short buffers.

Could you take a packet capture of a test without cake?

> It got slammed down to 49 here:
> 

Ouch. And your uplink went to heck, also. The other worrisome thing
has been powersave and interacting with the
request/grant processes badly.

>
> I disabled cake and it slowly recovered:
> 
> 
>
> (I wish the tests had a timestamp so I could be sure I'm ordering them
> correctly.)
>
>
> ___
> Bloat mailing list
> bl...@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat



-- 
I tried to build a better future, a few times:
https://wayforward.archive.org/?site=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icei.org

Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC
___
Cerowrt-devel mailing list
Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] [Bloat] tp-link request for SQM

[Dave Taht]

On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 4:00 AM Luca Muscariello  wrote:
>
> Test using a tp-link AP EAP 245
>
> https://www.waveform.com/tools/bufferbloat?test-id=bbcc5ef5-e677-4f27-aa04-1849db81d0f5

Nice.

A kvetch is that I really wish they also tested up and down at the same time.

Another kvetch is I think the test needs to run longer at these speeds.

Another another kvetch is they factor in baseline latency to determine
if the link is suitable for gaming or not.

We had them participating on this list at some point

>
>
> On Thu, Dec 2, 2021 at 7:48 PM Dave Taht  wrote:
>>
>> tp-link, is, so far as I know, the last major home router vendor NOT
>> shipping a SQM system. Perhaps this could be modded up with someones
>> with accounts?
>>
>> https://community.tp-link.com/us/home/forum/topic/511156
>>
>>
>> --
>> I tried to build a better future, a few times:
>> https://wayforward.archive.org/?site=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icei.org
>>
>> Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC
>> ___
>> Bloat mailing list
>> bl...@lists.bufferbloat.net
>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat



-- 
I tried to build a better future, a few times:
https://wayforward.archive.org/?site=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icei.org

Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC
___
Cerowrt-devel mailing list
Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] [Bloat] tp-link request for SQM

[Kenneth Porter]

--On Thursday, December 02, 2021 10:48 AM -0800 Dave Taht 
 wrote:



tp-link, is, so far as I know, the last major home router vendor NOT
shipping a SQM system. Perhaps this could be modded up with someones
with accounts?

https://community.tp-link.com/us/home/forum/topic/511156


I just signed up an account and will add my vote.

I just bought an Archer 20 to replace my old 2016 Zyxel running OpenWrt. 
I'd found it by looking at various reviews of "best OpenWrt router for 
2021". I just updated my Zyxel firmware from v18 to v20 firmware. I get 
about 280 Mbps from Xfinity. I turned on cake and it dropped by 50%! So I 
think the old router's CPU isn't up to it. I'll be swapping in the TP-Link 
soon so I can turn on cake without the big performance hit.



___
Cerowrt-devel mailing list
Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] [Bloat] tp-link request for SQM

[Sebastian Moeller]

> On Dec 3, 2021, at 11:10, Kenneth Porter  wrote:
> 
> --On Thursday, December 02, 2021 10:48 AM -0800 Dave Taht 
>  wrote:
> 
>> tp-link, is, so far as I know, the last major home router vendor NOT
>> shipping a SQM system. Perhaps this could be modded up with someones
>> with accounts?
>> 
>> https://community.tp-link.com/us/home/forum/topic/511156
> 
> I just signed up an account and will add my vote.
> 
> I just bought an Archer 20 to replace my old 2016 Zyxel running OpenWrt. I'd 
> found it by looking at various reviews of "best OpenWrt router for 2021". I 
> just updated my Zyxel firmware from v18 to v20 firmware. I get about 280 Mbps 
> from Xfinity. I turned on cake and it dropped by 50%! So I think the old 
> router's CPU isn't up to it. I'll be swapping in the TP-Link soon so I can 
> turn on cake without the big performance hit.

Getting low latency traffic shaping to work in a robust and reliable 
way above say ~100Mbps is still a challenge even for relatively recent router 
SoCs. Modern multicore SoCs upped the ante in the things-to-look-out for area 
by adding CPU power-saving (especially frequency scaling) and load distribution 
over CPUs to the mix... Now even something like a raspberry pi 4B with an 
additional well-selected USB3 gigabit ethernet dongle (costing less than 100 
EUR all in all) will allow cake up to 1/1 Gbps but still requires careful 
configuration to do so. No idea whether an archer 20 will do (not even sure 
what model that is, here in Germany I see either an C20 or an AX20 but no plain 
unadorned 20). If you should try OpenWrt on that thing, the OpenWrt forum is a 
good place to ask for configuration advice for specific models (will obviously 
not help if you stick to the manufacturer's firmware).

Regards
Sebastian



> 
> 
> ___
> Bloat mailing list
> bl...@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat

___
Cerowrt-devel mailing list
Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel