Re: [Bloat] [bbr-dev] new paper from Kleinrock on "Power" and to some extent BBR

On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 6:02 PM Jonathan Morton wrote: > > > On 28 Aug, 2018, at 3:59 am, Dave Taht wrote: > > > > "Internet congestion control using the power metric: Keep the pipe > > just full, but no fuller" is quite a good read (appears to be open > > access pdf, too): > > > >

Re: [Bloat] [Make-wifi-fast] [Cerowrt-devel] closing up my make-wifi-fast lab

Hmm, not sure I understand the distinction. CTS per the AP informs those other transmitters to stay quiet per the CTS NAV. I may be misunderstanding things. Thanks for the continued discussions. It helps to better thoroughly understand the issues. Bob On Mon, Aug 27, 2018, 6:52 PM David

Re: [Bloat] [Make-wifi-fast] [Cerowrt-devel] closing up my make-wifi-fast lab

I thought that RTS/CTS would handle the case of hidden nodes, i.e. a device that fails to successfully transmit can resort to RTS/CTS to get the receiver to reserve time for it. Also, lack of a RX ack seems ok to trigger MAC level retransmits. It seems the LBT bug is the collision avoidance

Re: [Bloat] [bbr-dev] new paper from Kleinrock on "Power" and to some extent BBR

> On 28 Aug, 2018, at 3:59 am, Dave Taht wrote: > > "Internet congestion control using the power metric: Keep the pipe > just full, but no fuller" is quite a good read (appears to be open > access pdf, too): > > https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1570870518302476 Well it isn't

[Bloat] new paper from Kleinrock on "Power" and to some extent BBR

"Internet congestion control using the power metric: Keep the pipe just full, but no fuller" is quite a good read (appears to be open access pdf, too): https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1570870518302476 ___ Bloat mailing list

Re: [Bloat] [Make-wifi-fast] [Cerowrt-devel] closing up my make-wifi-fast lab

Indeed - and conversely, there may be interference that the transmitter can hear clearly but which is irrelevant to the intended receiver. In that case, any form of LBT will be needlessly conservative. - Jonathan Morton ___ Bloat mailing list

Re: [Bloat] [Make-wifi-fast] [Cerowrt-devel] closing up my make-wifi-fast lab

ok thanks, that's helpful. I guess I thought if astrophysicists can direct image exoplanets a WiFi device should be able to detect superposition - though, talk about some giant hand waving! ;) Bob On Mon, Aug

Re: [Bloat] [Make-wifi-fast] [Cerowrt-devel] closing up my make-wifi-fast lab

> On 27 Aug, 2018, at 10:11 pm, Bob McMahon wrote: > > I guess my question is can a WiFi transmitting device rely on primarily > energy detect and mostly ignore the EDCA probability game and rather search > for (or predict) unused spectrum per a time interval such that its digital > signal

Re: [Bloat] [Make-wifi-fast] [Cerowrt-devel] closing up my make-wifi-fast lab

I guess my question is can a WiFi transmitting device rely on primarily energy detect and mostly ignore the EDCA probability game and rather search for (or predict) unused spectrum per a time interval such that its digital signal has enough power per its observed SNR? Then detect "collisions"

Re: [Bloat] Marvell 385

On Sun, 26 Aug 2018, Dave Taht wrote: I was on that thread. It was broken before entirely. As for the single interrupt on this chip variant - believe it or not, I'm not huge on When doing 10GE tests on x86-64 I received the highest performance when I set interrupt affinity to single core per

Re: [Bloat] [Make-wifi-fast] [Cerowrt-devel] closing up my make-wifi-fast lab

Hi Jonathan, I think in 802.11ax the AP can schedule STAs to some extent so it looks like that technique is coming soon. It is a bw tradeoff per the RUs per user. Multi-User Uplink Operation To coordinate uplink MU-MIMO or uplink OFDMA transmissions the AP sends a trigger frame to all users.

Re: [Bloat] debloats/day metric?

> On 27 Aug, 2018, at 10:44 am, Pete Heist wrote: > > …request pairs, one given strict priority at the bottleneck and one best > effort, then measure the difference between the two (for both RTT and OWD). > > Assuming this yields useful data… For the overwhelming majority of bloated

Re: [Bloat] [Make-wifi-fast] [Cerowrt-devel] closing up my make-wifi-fast lab

> On 27 Aug, 2018, at 10:06 am, Bob McMahon wrote: > > How can a centralized device predict the many "end stations'" network demand > in its time scheduling? DOCSIS does it by initially giving stations a tiny window into which to send requests for time, which are granted by the head-end.

Re: [Bloat] [Make-wifi-fast] [Cerowrt-devel] closing up my make-wifi-fast lab

Hi Bob, I meant licensed/unlicensed for private/non private. Luca On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 9:39 AM Bob McMahon wrote: > Hi Luca, > > What is non private spectrum defined as per "I don't yet see how a non > private spectrum can be shared w/o LBT." > > Thanks, > Bob > > > > > On Mon, Aug 27,

Re: [Bloat] debloats/day metric?

Not sure how to answer exactly, but I’m interested in some way to measure bloat more directly both instantaneously and over time. My current plan for instantaneous measurement is to modify irtt to send request pairs, one given strict priority at the bottleneck and one best effort, then measure

Re: [Bloat] [Make-wifi-fast] [Cerowrt-devel] closing up my make-wifi-fast lab

Hi Luca, What is non private spectrum defined as per "I don't yet see how a non private spectrum can be shared w/o LBT." Thanks, Bob On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 12:24 AM Luca Muscariello < luca.muscarie...@gmail.com> wrote: > Jonathan, > > Not that giant handwaving though. > IEEE 802.11ax

Re: [Bloat] [Make-wifi-fast] [Cerowrt-devel] closing up my make-wifi-fast lab

Jonathan, Not that giant handwaving though. IEEE 802.11ax makes use of "almost TDM" RTS/CTS and scheduling. The almost is necessary as it operates in 2.4/5Ghz bands. Similar to what you describe, and is coming very soon in shipping products. RTS/CTS is still a LBT to create a window where TDM

Re: [Bloat] [Make-wifi-fast] [Cerowrt-devel] closing up my make-wifi-fast lab

hmm, "going back" to TDM, doesn't that lose the benefits and efficiencies per statistical multiplexing? How can a centralized device predict the many "end stations'" network demand in its time scheduling? Note: I think with 802.11ax this is happening to some extent per uplink OFDMA but that

Re: [Bloat] [Make-wifi-fast] [Cerowrt-devel] closing up my make-wifi-fast lab

> On 27 Aug, 2018, at 9:00 am, Bob McMahon wrote: > > Curious to how LBT can be solved at the PHY level and if the potential > solution sets preserve the end to end principle. The usual alternatives include TDM, usually coordinated by a master device (eg. the AP); full-duplex operation via

Re: [Bloat] [Make-wifi-fast] [Cerowrt-devel] closing up my make-wifi-fast lab

Curious to how LBT can be solved at the PHY level and if the potential solution sets preserve the end to end principle. Bob On Sun, Aug 26, 2018 at 5:26 AM David P. Reed wrote: > Baran: I got the year wrong. I remember it as 1993, but it was 1994 CNGN > speech he made, which is resurrected