lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Wed, 04 Jul 2012 19:23:21 +0200
From:	Eric Dumazet <>
To:	Hagen Paul Pfeifer <>
Cc:	netdev <>, Yuchung Cheng <>,
	Andreas Terzis <>,
	Mark Gordon <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] netem: fix rate extension and drop accounting

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 ?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists