Its good that they are running the latency test also during the load test, but
from what it looks like, they seem to be running the latency test to the same
server as the load test. I think a more realistic test is to run the load test
to one server and the latency test to a different server.
Toke,
How you see this coming into Flent? My understanding is that for latency &
load test like RRUL:
-iperf provides the bandwidth portion
-IRTT provides the latency portion, and if IRTT is not found, the test falls
back to ICMP for the latency check
Would netperf replace iperf for the bandw
"attempt a dpdk port of fq_codel/cake"
Do you know if this was accepted as a project? Would love to hear the outcome
on how it goes over the summer if it was.
Regards,
Carl Klatsky
-Original Message-
From: Bloat On Behalf Of Dave Taht
Sent: Monday, February 4, 2019 2:56 PM
To: bloat
-Jørgensen [mailto:t...@toke.dk]
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 10:47 AM
To: Klatsky, Carl
Cc: Dave Taht ; bloat ;
flent-us...@flent.org; cerowrt-de...@lists.bufferbloat.net;
c...@lists.bufferbloat.net; make-wifi-f...@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: [Make-wifi-fast] [Cake] flent testers
Finally had some time to get to this request. I downloaded the current git
version of Flent and was able to launch the flent-gui on Windows. I had some
old test *.flent.gz results files which loaded just fine. I tried to open the
test files that were linked from Pete Heist mail "[Cake] Flent
Is it correct to assume that the bufferbloat grade is based off of the
difference between the idle latency and the upload / download latencies, and
not some absolute value ranges of milliseconds?
Regards,
Carl Klatsky
From: Bloat [mailto:bloat-boun...@lists.bufferbloat.net] On Behalf Of jb
Sent
Yuchung,
In regards to DOCSIS PIE as part of upcoming DOCSIS 3.1 equipment, single queue
PIE will first be deployed on the D3.1 cable modem governing the upstream
direction. So the test of BBR & other CCs in the mixed environment would be
run with the BBR & other CC sending sources on a server
> On Tue, 1 Nov 2016, Yuchung Cheng wrote:
>
> > We are curious why you choose the single-queued AQM. Is it just for
> > the sake of testing?
>
> Non-flow aware AQM is the most commonly deployed "queue
> management" on the Internet today. Most of them are just stupid FIFOs
> with taildrop, and th
Was forwarded a story today about someone using a 10Gbps residential broadband
connection:
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/10-gbps-fiber-internet-fastest-home-internet-in-the-united-states
Regards,
Carl Klatsky
On 27/10/16 21:48, Aaron Wood wrote:
> That sounds like it was in the right ballpa
: justinbe...@gmail.com [mailto:justinbe...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of jb
Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2016 5:20 PM
To: Klatsky, Carl
Cc: Benjamin Cronce ; bloat
Subject: Re: [Bloat] 22 seconds til bloat on gfiber?
Carl, that run you linked to didn't have bloat high frequency option set.
To set i
Perhaps I am misunderstanding the different output between the ‘low-res’ and
‘high-res’ versions of the test. The link below was from Corporate LAN with
the ‘hi-res’ preference set & saved. To me the output looks like prior test
run output. Maybe I have been seeing ‘hi-res’ output all along a
ut the settings that match my internet connection, and when I go back to
the speedtest page, I have that button to use.
Unfortunately, it makes all the other buttons go away.
On 10/24/2016 9:13 AM, Klatsky, Carl wrote:
Thanks Justin. I found the Preferences and set to Hi-Res bufferbloat testing,
, will take a look at the graph.
In the test preferences screen, under Advanced.
see screen shot hopefully attached.
thanks.
On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 3:14 AM, Klatsky, Carl
mailto:carl_klat...@comcast.com>> wrote:
Justin,
How does one initiate the ‘hi-res’ tests? On the site, I am only seei
Justin,
How does one initiate the ‘hi-res’ tests? On the site, I am only seeing the
regular speed / bloat test get launched.
Side comment – could you please label the graph with units? I read it as
X-axis is time in seconds and Y-axis as latency in milliseconds, but having the
explicit label
On Thu, 20 Oct 2016, Rich Brown wrote:
> https://www.nanog.org/sites/default/files/20160922_Klatsky_First_Steps
> _In_v1.pdf
Does anyone understand what access speeds these customers had during these
tests?
[Carl Klatsky] For this trial, the customers were provisioned with 110 Mbps
down / 10 Mb
15 matches
Mail list logo
