[tsvwg] FCT tests of Prague in shared RFC3168 queues
Pete Heist <pete@heistp.net> Wed, 10 March 2021 12:52 UTC
Return-Path: <pete@heistp.net>
X-Original-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10F773A0A1E for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 04:52:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.967
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.967 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URI_DOTEDU=0.132] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=heistp.net
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ois51Bp_tNk3 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 04:52:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wm1-x331.google.com (mail-wm1-x331.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::331]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 084D33A09F6 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 04:52:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wm1-x331.google.com with SMTP id r15-20020a05600c35cfb029010e639ca09eso10953290wmq.1 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 04:52:31 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=heistp.net; s=google; h=message-id:subject:from:to:date:user-agent:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding; bh=McE+KDUyp+VAZWgqZh4c2GYiG/kGAo/FN9sJBB6RI6A=; b=IAyUJs8dh8Pg2OENkAzQPoHzz0MHF4IVx99kC/WLDSbAH86lGkvGBIPYqR1pO64kF4 ISBbpSm58AZokovazYBUIo+hg5mCA9RVBrJk/m+0MM+5Ak8j1NSChVe15ZcWY/DG/HXE AWruw9lkVcpRgtr67Hdvnj9QMtB2pzFNGyfDNTaWFzX7NqcldZX9n6OJ81Df4lByFswL e6khiVjXvHWIXJgxC90e9SXv1ckK2geFXwdCm7/P/c7loWohWkqeImJHmTuuztqzFz/d Dzt7bcrClQzkUy7Wz9HEHvdmR2DBAbE8jaD0NyifOQULHKyqESqjSkJy/OyafErkWMW6 PkrQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:subject:from:to:date:user-agent :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=McE+KDUyp+VAZWgqZh4c2GYiG/kGAo/FN9sJBB6RI6A=; b=bQePPxkaVPyd+ozS5B1qQAiUVQrrCiAQIfjhIEZCmR2dS9TkiV3riycSTroe24eEY0 6w2BBKIyTzzWyxMmrS43R7ft8H+i6g+wOKMhQziK0dKJwUjYPit8JBt86WsGToIZDqo3 WX77RWxq0VVATtRwcwtsBKjbe9n07KCG2JTXeStZrTboK77QTSTguNbtBpPIOsgWyJ8T ZaCrrq0mP8vEuUVOCqWF/jsTtfeDt6VfSPDoM4rID+Pg86leZjBVfnOsqt+AnVRuJs1H UMSLPLxNmEk5gnVRAOPto3GQdy9niFh/9Zhn5lRAMsus94Gv2tk9SHAs3FqZ7E1G5UI+ 4TAQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531YBy6jah8CssqhIFYe46tfN/TzGimDaQYtscn4bkk4YozZCmKH OuQue9OVHGS6mXFn+bmG1vxVG7mK1V/QXQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy06usuemC6eR/lqh53fkEv8eTw/FzG0v7Rup7pNgXzZvpEALu4KYlalJnYDHf4ag4CIo2ywA==
X-Received: by 2002:a7b:cdf7:: with SMTP id p23mr3295226wmj.26.1615380747356; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 04:52:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.72.0.88] (h-1169.lbcfree.net. [185.193.85.130]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c35sm8276680wmp.3.2021.03.10.04.52.26 for <tsvwg@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 10 Mar 2021 04:52:27 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <56ba28929ef26015e6c1a5e9798f5403622036d8.camel@heistp.net>
From: Pete Heist <pete@heistp.net>
To: tsvwg IETF list <tsvwg@ietf.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2021 13:52:26 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.38.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/ICN0ZaxSe4NtAfzyZYLXWoVPIxA>
Subject: [tsvwg] FCT tests of Prague in shared RFC3168 queues
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tsvwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2021 12:52:34 -0000
We've run tests of flow completion time (FCT) for CUBIC flows, in competition with single CUBIC or Prague flows in a shared RFC3168 queue. The results are in the l4s-tests repo, and below. https://github.com/heistp/l4s-tests/#harm-to-flow-completion-time TL;DR In shared RFC3168 queues with the chosen parameters, median and P95 FCT increase significantly across RTTs with Prague as the competition, compared to CUBIC. Flow arrival times use an exponential distribution, and flow lengths a lognormal distribution, with the parameters below. "Harm" calculations (https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~rware/assets/pdf/ware-hotnets19.pdf) are added for each metric. The results are just text, so I'll include them here. Test Parameters: ---------------- CCAs under test: cubic, prague RTTs: 10ms, 20ms, 40ms, 80ms, 160ms Bandwidth: 50Mbps Qdisc: fq_codel flows 1 Slow start delay: 20s FCT Workload Parameters: ------------------------ Server URL: localhost:8188 CCA: cubic Duration: 3m0s Flows: 900 Mean arrival time: 200ms Est. bandwidth: 25.83Mbps Flow lengths (lognormal distribution): |- P5: 65536 |- Mean: 645683 |- P95: 2097152 RTT CCA GeoMean (Harm) Median (Harm) P95 (Harm) --- --- -------------- ------------- ---------- 10ms - 176.2ms 154.3ms 1061.3ms 10ms cubic 339.3ms (0.481) 314.9ms (0.510) 2002.7ms (0.470) 10ms prague 1171.3ms (0.850) 1131.7ms (0.864) 7305.2ms (0.855) 20ms - 243.0ms 211.5ms 1155.3ms 20ms cubic 376.6ms (0.355) 351.7ms (0.399) 1986.0ms (0.418) 20ms prague 1394.1ms (0.826) 1385.3ms (0.847) 8454.8ms (0.863) 40ms - 369.2ms 317.8ms 1634.7ms 40ms cubic 475.7ms (0.224) 423.9ms (0.250) 2179.9ms (0.250) 40ms prague 1643.8ms (0.775) 1637.7ms (0.806) 9879.3ms (0.835) 80ms - 599.9ms 554.5ms 2135.6ms 80ms cubic 906.7ms (0.338) 846.9ms (0.345) 3709.4ms (0.424) 80ms prague 2384.8ms (0.748) 2228.4ms (0.751) 12159.9ms (0.824) 160ms - 976.6ms 976.4ms 3465.1ms 160ms cubic 1127.7ms (0.134) 1043.2ms (0.064) 4207.8ms (0.177) 160ms prague 2471.9ms (0.605) 2174.7ms (0.551) 14418.8ms (0.760)