Mail mail provider unhelpfully labelled my post as SPAM, and apparently all 
receivers rejected to receive my "SPAM"
Hence I try forwarding a slightly edited version of my response below, hoping 
not to trigger GMX's SPAM detection again.


> Begin forwarded message:
> 
> From: Sebastian Moeller <moell...@gmx.de>
> Subject: Re: [Make-wifi-fast] [Rpm] make-wifi-fast 2016 & crusader
> Date: December 8, 2022 at 11:15:12 GMT+1
> To: rjmcmahon <rjmcma...@rjmcmahon.com>
> Cc: rjmcmahon via Make-wifi-fast <make-wifi-f...@lists.bufferbloat.net>, Dave 
> Täht <dave.t...@gmail.com>, Rpm <r...@lists.bufferbloat.net>, libreqos 
> <libre...@lists.bufferbloat.net>, Dave Taht via Starlink 
> <starl...@lists.bufferbloat.net>, bloat <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>
> 
> Hi Bob,
> 
> thanks for the detailed response.
> 
> 
>> On Dec 7, 2022, at 20:28, rjmcmahon <rjmcma...@rjmcmahon.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Sebastian,
>> 
>> Per Aristotle: "That which is common to the greatest number gets the least 
>> amount of care. Men pay most attention to what is their own: they care less 
>> for what is common."
>> 
>> I think a challenge for many of us providing open source tooling is the lack 
>> of resource support to supply goods for all. Both the iperf 2 and iperf 3 
>> teams are under-resourced so we try not to duplicate each other too much 
>> except for where that duplication adds value (e.g. having two independently 
>> written socket measurement tools.) The iperf 3 team has provided public 
>> servers, I think at their costs.
> 
>       [SM] I should probably clarify my position, I was not trying to argue 
> that you (or your employer) should operate public iperf2 servers, but that 
> the availability of such servers probably is what made iperf3 the most 
> popular of the iperf2/iperf3/netperf triple. I did not realize that the 
> iperf3 team operates some of the public servers, as I have already seen ISPs 
> (see e.g. hxxps://speedtest.wtnet.de) that offer iperf3 as mean for their 
> existing users to run speedtest via iperf3. So my argument should gone more 
> along the lines of, "to make iperf2 as popular as it deserves to be some 
> publicity and available servers will help a lot". And actually having servers 
> operated by other parties than the toll maker is an added "vote of 
> confidence".
> 
> 
>> I've been holding off on iperf 2 public servers until I found an additional 
>> value add and a way to pay for them.
> 
>       [SM] Understood, and I formulated inartfully, implying you should host 
> iperf2 servers; that was not my intent.
> 
>> Much of the iperf 2 work has been around one way delay (OWD) or latency. 
>> Doing this well requires GPS clock sync on both the data center servers and 
>> the end host devices. I checked into this a few years ago and found that 
>> this level of clock sync wasn't available via rented servers (e.g. linode or 
>> Hurricane Electric) so I put on hold any further investigation of public 
>> servers for iperf 2 as being redundant with iperf 3. Those that need true 
>> e2e latency (vs RTTs) have to build their own so-to-speak.
> 
>       [SM] Yepp, except for congestion detection all that is really required 
> is sufficiently stable clocks, as the delay differences between idle and 
> loaded tests are quite informative and offering OWDs allows to pinpoint the 
> direction of congestion.
> 
>> I know of two nonprofit measurement labs being mlabs and ripe (there may be 
>> more) that could take an interest but neither has:
>> 
>> hxxps://www.ripe.net/
>> hxxps://www.measurementlab.net/
> 
>       [SM] I think ripe especially their ATLAS network is somewhat 
> "sensitive" about throughput tests, as quite some nodes likely are operated 
> by enthusiasts in their leaf networks that are not well suited as generic 
> speedtest servers... (however that would allow great studies of achievable 
> throughput comparing different ASs).
> 
>> There could be a market opportunity for somebody to build a measurement 
>> system in the cloud that supported any generic sensors and could signal 
>> anomalies. Then one could connect iperf 2 public servers to that as an 
>> offering.
>> 
>> Note: Some GPS atomic clock options for RPi:
>> hxxps://store.uputronics.com/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=81
>> hxxps://store.timebeat.app/products/gnss-raspberry-pi-cm4-module?variant=41934772764843
> 
>       [SM] I followed your lead several moths ago, and have an 
> GPS-disciplined NTP server in my homenetwork already, so I am prepared for 
> true OWD measurements ;)
> 
> 
>> Also needed is the latest iperf 2 on an openwrt router.
> 
>       [SM] That will work well for the low throughput test, but I often see 
> that routers that are fully capable of routing X Mbps get into issues when 
> trying to source and/or sink the same X Mbps, so it becomes essential to 
> monitor router "load" while running tests (something that is also still on 
> the TODO list for cake-autorate, we should throttle our shapers if the 
> traffic load exceeds a router's capability to schedule CPU slots timely to 
> the shaper qdiscs).
> 
>> Better may be to have that router also run ptp4l or equivalent and behave as 
>> a PTP grandmaster.
> 
>       [SM] In OpenWrt it is simple to enable an NTP server would it not be 
> enough to feed that server via PTP? Otherwise the router would need to 
> include the high precision clock. And as much as I love my GPS disciplined 
> NTP server, I have reservations whether I think it a great idea to make GPS 
> receivers a default router feature (I think this will play into the hand of 
> location restricted internet access/offering which could easily be abused* 
> and unlike geoIP it might be tempting to use that information at court as 
> well).
> 
>> Unfortunately, my day job requires me to focus on "shareholder interests" 
>> and, in that context, it's very difficult to provide public goods that are 
>> nonrivalrous and nonexcludable. hxxps://tinyurl.com/mr63p52k
>> 
>> Finally, we all have to deal with "why we sleep" in order to be most 
>> productive (despite what Mr. Musk thinks.)
>> 
>> hxxps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_We_Sleep
>> 
>> and there are only so many "awake hours" for us "non-exceptional" engineers 
>> ;-) (A joke, everybody has value by my book.)
> 
>       [SM] ;) the time-limit also applies for non-engineers as well 
> (independent of exceptions). Fun fact, for most measures most of us fall into 
> the non-exceptional category anyway.
> 
> Regards
>       Sebastian
> 
> P.S.: Getting iperf2 into OpenWrt and offering a howto how to make that 
> available to the outside would be great (as would easy recipes how to install 
> iperf2 on containers or VPS). I admit however that I did not do my research 
> here and both howto and recipes might already exist. And again this is not 
> intended as something for your "plate"/TODO list just as relative simple/low 
> cost/low effort ways to make iperf2 more salient generally.
> 
> 
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Bob

_______________________________________________
Bloat mailing list
Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat

Reply via email to