Re: [Bloat] grading bloat better

2016-10-12 Thread Jonathan Morton 

> On 13 Oct, 2016, at 06:22, Dave Taht  wrote:
> 
> I still might quibble, but a trimmed mean makes more sense than just a mean.
> 
> Problem I always have is bloat is biased always towards the end of a test. 
> Here,
> at 1gbit, it took nearly 20 seconds to start going boom. Maybe we need
> to invent a new distribution (The bloat distribution? The TCP
> distribution)...

Perhaps the 90th percentile would be relevant - the median is simply the 50th 
percentile.  Taking the 90th avoids counting true flukes, but also captures the 
idea that intermittently high latency is in fact noticeable.

 - Jonathan Morton

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

Re: [Bloat] grading bloat better

2016-10-12 Thread jb 
It is done
under the trimmed mean method, that would be a "C" grade result.



On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 11:46 AM, jb  wrote:

> Actually I think the concept I need is the trimmed mean.
> throwing away the highest couple of values (lowest couple are not to be
> thrown away because they can't be errant).
> It isn't perfect but it would help.
>
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 11:39 AM, jb  wrote:
>
>> A while ago I changed from mean to median with the reasoning being that
>> one spike to a crazy level was not representative of bloat but instead
>> representative of a network stall or other anomaly. Graphs that were nearly
>> all good samples with one outlier were being unfairly graded poorly.
>>
>> But this example has the opposite issue - the median of this set of
>> samples is the first half where everything is ok. Hence the good score.
>> Using a mean would be correct for this sample.
>> What should happen is to throw away a couple (max) outliers first, then
>> do a mean to avoid punishing the results that come in as good but include
>> one errant measurement.
>>
>> thanks
>> -Justin
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 11:16 PM, Dave Taht  wrote:
>>
>>> This has major bloat happening at the end of the upload test. Which
>>> worries me - here, at a gbit.
>>>
>>> http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/5284047
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dave Täht
>>> Let's go make home routers and wifi faster! With better software!
>>> http://blog.cerowrt.org
>>> ___
>>> Bloat mailing list
>>> Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
>>>
>>
>>
>
___
Bloat mailing list
Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat

Re: [Bloat] [Make-wifi-fast] the wifi airtime-fair fq_codel stuff on net-next looks mostly good

2016-10-12 Thread Dave Taht 
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 8:32 AM, Jim Gettys  wrote:
> All I can say is I bow down to your persistence...

The .debs are airtime-8 for a reason. I kept bisecting until I
bothered to boot into a normal kernel and realized that my main test
box had broken in the move during the loma prieta fire. I can show you
some really horrible graphs of what happens to wifi under stress with
no antennas attached

> Congratulations!

Thx. I'm logging out for a few days. Toke's giving a talk wednesday...

http://openwrtsummit.org/#quick-details

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

Re: [Bloat] [Make-wifi-fast] the wifi airtime-fair fq_codel stuff on net-next looks mostly good

2016-10-12 Thread Jim Gettys 
All I can say is I bow down to your persistence...

Congratulations!
  - Jim


On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Dave Taht  wrote:

> Which I just wrote up here:
>
> http://blog.cerowrt.org/post/real_results/
>
> Warning: includes a dancing cat video!
>
> My principal goal was to make sure *they didn't crash*, and I got
> carried away.  .. we seem to have a problem with the local TCP stack
> in some cases and I went through some hell with OSX discussed in
> earlier blog entries.
>
> Everybody else (hopefully) took a 3 day holiday this past weekend. I'm
> taking one starting now.
> ___
> Make-wifi-fast mailing list
> make-wifi-f...@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/make-wifi-fast
>
___
Bloat mailing list
Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat

[Bloat] the wifi airtime-fair fq_codel stuff on net-next looks mostly good

2016-10-12 Thread Dave Taht 
Which I just wrote up here:

http://blog.cerowrt.org/post/real_results/

Warning: includes a dancing cat video!

My principal goal was to make sure *they didn't crash*, and I got
carried away.  .. we seem to have a problem with the local TCP stack
in some cases and I went through some hell with OSX discussed in
earlier blog entries.

Everybody else (hopefully) took a 3 day holiday this past weekend. I'm
taking one starting now.
___
Bloat mailing list
Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat

[Bloat] grading bloat better

2016-10-12 Thread Dave Taht 
This has major bloat happening at the end of the upload test. Which
worries me - here, at a gbit.

http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/5284047

-- 
Dave Täht
Let's go make home routers and wifi faster! With better software!
http://blog.cerowrt.org
___
Bloat mailing list
Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat