Confirmed users, Bureaucrats and Sysops emeriti
1,680
edits
Networking/Archive/Necko/Performance/AutomatedTesting: Difference between revisions
Networking/Archive/Necko/Performance/AutomatedTesting (view source)
Revision as of 05:18, 25 February 2012
, 25 February 2012→Supported NeckoNet Profiles
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
== Supported NeckoNet Profiles == | == Supported NeckoNet Profiles == | ||
None of these are cutting edge so they should make reasonable broad based targets. Implementations by ISPs vary widely so its easy to find counter examples, but I would argue for optimizing for the lower end where we make choices. | |||
* Average Broadband" | |||
** An upper bound on things worth measuring, though they certainly do get faster than this: 90ms rtt, 10mbit of bandwidth, 0 jitter. | |||
* Modern Mobile | |||
** A semi-advanced 3g or bad 4g network: 150ms rtt, 1 mbit of bandwidth, and 20ms of jitter. Sometimes this technology does work better than this - but this seems to be a common point of degradation. | |||
* Classic Mobile | |||
** Something like an hspda or even edge handset. 300ms rtt, 400kbps of bandwidth and 40ms of jitter. | |||
In all cases the bandwidth should be shared across all IPs. I didn't model loss here, even tough it can be an issue, because its randomness would introduce way too much variability into short tests. As a separate effort we could build tests with deterministic loss. | |||
== Supported Test Client Configurations == | == Supported Test Client Configurations == | ||