public inbox for netdev@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
To: Hagen Paul Pfeifer <hagen@jauu.net>
Cc: netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@google.com>,
	Andreas Terzis <aterzis@google.com>, Mark Gordon <msg@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] netem: fix rate extension and drop accounting
Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2012 19:23:21 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1341422601.2583.2393.camel@edumazet-glaptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120704165132.GA3455@nuttenaction>

On Wed, 2012-07-04 at 18:51 +0200, Hagen Paul Pfeifer wrote:
> OK, I will work on it tomorrow! But Eric, keep in mind that this accumulative
> behavior is intended: think about a hypothetical satellite link with a
> bandwidth (rate) of 1000 byte/s. If you send three 1000 byte consecutively
> packets. The first packet is delayed for 1 second, the second then is
> transmitted after 2 seconds, the third after three seconds and so on. So
> _this_ accumulative behavior is correct. Anyway, I will look at this tomorrow!
> 

I fear you did your tests with no delay on netem.

Try to setup a rate of 100kbit and a delay of 100ms and to really get
full bandwith (100kbit), I am afraid it doesnt work.

Your algo is OK only if no packets are in queue (obviously)

But if you have 2 or 3 packets, the delay are cumulative,
but the delay should be a fixed bias for each packet.


> Thanks Eric!
> 
> PS: one last question: what do you want to test? TBF and netem rate at the
> same time looks, mmhh, special ... ;-) I ask myself what link exhibit this
> characteristic?

TBF as a netem child was the usual way to have delay + rate before your
patch ?

Not sure why you find it special ?

  reply	other threads:[~2012-07-04 17:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-07-03  9:25 [PATCH] netem: fix rate extension and drop accounting Eric Dumazet
2012-07-03  9:54 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-07-03 22:04   ` Hagen Paul Pfeifer
2012-07-04  5:58     ` Eric Dumazet
2012-07-04 16:51       ` Hagen Paul Pfeifer
2012-07-04 17:23         ` Eric Dumazet [this message]
2012-07-04 17:30           ` Hagen Paul Pfeifer
     [not found] ` <CAPVr9VP7DniPZj4vZi_myJWfL5JLYKYTXXtrXcKHo9LjEQzjYw@mail.gmail.com>
2012-07-16 23:26   ` Hagen Paul Pfeifer
2012-07-17  5:12     ` Eric Dumazet
     [not found]       ` <CAPVr9VMCYFO-7uEzO6ft2vpPhVvRgHB3EWJJG62OqGqux1LsZQ@mail.gmail.com>
2012-07-17 17:39         ` Eric Dumazet

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1341422601.2583.2393.camel@edumazet-glaptop \
    --to=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
    --cc=aterzis@google.com \
    --cc=hagen@jauu.net \
    --cc=msg@google.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ycheng@google.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox