Re: [BUG] CCID3 performance is f**ked

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 12/1/06, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <arnaldo.melo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Can I suggest that people test CCID3 on a range of loss, rtt
> combinations please? CCID3 has proven time after time to be very
> sensitive....

As I told you, I'm preparing a more comprehensive test environment
here, just being sidetracked by some problems using net-2.6.20 on a
parisc64 machine.

- Arnaldo

Yes you did say that which is good. I will try and document my test
procedures on OSDL Wiki at some stage. Basically I just use netem on
Linux router though and compare performance to
http://wand.net.nz/~perry/max_download.php (remember to set MSS to
packet size used in iperf) - results within about 20% are normal.

Local machines I get 80+Mbits (on 100 Mbits card) and 30-40 Mbits on
machine through router.

If you get a funny test result then rerun as random netem loss can
cause random results at times. I usually run iperf for 10-20 seconds
(10 is the default)

Ian
--
Web: http://wand.net.nz/~iam4
Blog: http://imcdnzl.blogspot.com
WAND Network Research Group
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe dccp" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [IETF DCCP]     [Linux Networking]     [Git]     [Security]     [Linux Assembly]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux