Re: [EToSat] Download Regression Tests

[Christian Huitema <[e-mail]>]

On 12/4/2019 7:02 PM, Gorry Fairhurst wrote:
> On 04/12/2019, 08:14, Kuhn Nicolas wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> We had initiated a regression test description in the QUIC 4 SATCOM
>> document.
>>
>> https://github.com/NicoKos/QUIC_HIGH_BDP/tree/master/ietf-document/draft-quic-4-sat
>>
>>
>> An updated version in a more readable format than XML is attached and
>> in the GITHUB repo.
>>
>> The scenario that you propose in more challenging than the ones we
>> had discussed with Gorry at Singapore.
>>
>> I have added your scenario in the document – but you may not want to
>> keep them all.
>>
>> What do you think ?
>>
>> I guess we can at least remove the 10 Mbps one.
>>
> [GF] I'd keep this for the moment. It's a simple enough test, and if
> you can fill 10 Mbps with a single stream, then that's pretty good.
>>
>> However, keeping the 50 Mbps / 10 Mbps shows a different asymmetry
>> and it may be interesting to keep it.
>>
>> More comments inline. 

Looking at the draft, I see that "the test should report ... The
downloading time of 100 MB on the download, The downloading time of 100
MB on the upload". I am a bit puzzled by the last sentence. Do you mean
"The uploading time of 100 MB on the upload"? And if you mean that, is
it really worth it measuring 100 MB there?

The 100MB upload certainly makes sense as a system validation test, but
it does not have a huge value as a non regression test. I mean, if we
can measure download on a 10/2 link, what do you believe will be learned
by measuring upload on a 50/10 link?

-- Christian Huitema