Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add bandwidth limitation for clumsy #70

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Apr 24, 2021
Merged

Add bandwidth limitation for clumsy #70

merged 8 commits into from
Apr 24, 2021

Conversation

skywind3000
Copy link

@skywind3000 skywind3000 commented Apr 13, 2020

@skywind3000
Copy link
Author

skywind3000 commented Apr 13, 2020

图片

prebuild binary:

https://github.com/skywind3000/clumsy/releases/tag/0.3rc3

@skywind3000
Copy link
Author

图片

@GTANAdam
Copy link

Excellent.

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Jul 17, 2020

Pls make a Clumsy 0.4

@jagt
Copy link
Owner

jagt commented Dec 28, 2020

Sorry just saw this recently. I'll try test it a bit and make a newer release soon.

@skywind3000
Copy link
Author

Thanks @jagt, if you have a better implementation, feel free to close this PR.

@Tester47c
Copy link

Sorry just saw this recently. I'll try test it a bit and make a newer release soon.

Thanks again! that would be awesome! I would like to see unlimited Latency no 3000ms cap, & maybe a new look in the GUI if possible? & add some new options, the bandwidth was a awesome feature! I'd like to see more features like that be added in the next release! #Clumsy 0.4 2021? (:

@baiyufei
Copy link

baiyufei commented Jan 4, 2021

@skywind3000

When the actual bandwidth is close to the limited bandwidth, we should first queue packets to buffer and delay sending, rather than directly discard them.

Algorithms such as Google Congestion Control using delay-based congestion controller will not work with this.

WebRTC using this tool will cause the receiver's video to freeze periodically.

@skywind3000
Copy link
Author

skywind3000 commented Jan 4, 2021

@baiyufei , gcc also got a loss-based algorithm, when delay-based failed in prediction, loss-based algorithm will give a right answer.

这只是一个带宽限制模拟,无法保证 100% 还原真实世界的带宽限制问题,要还原需要做非常多的细节,像 QQ 电脑管家那种带宽现值法,据我观测和这个实现非常类似,也是只模拟丢包不模拟延迟,很多公司内部网络的限速网关,基本也是这样工作的。

@baiyufei
Copy link

baiyufei commented Jan 5, 2021

@baiyufei , gcc also got a loss-based algorithm, when delay-based failed in prediction, loss-based algorithm will give a right answer.

这只是一个带宽限制模拟,无法保证 100% 还原真实世界的带宽限制问题,要还原需要做非常多的细节,像 QQ 电脑管家那种带宽现值法,据我观测和这个实现非常类似,也是只模拟丢包不模拟延迟,很多公司内部网络的限速网关,基本也是这样工作的。

Most routers have buffer.
Of course, direct discard is also a network model.

@Tester47c
Copy link

The bandwidth works perfectly in my opinion, I would just like too see more options be added as well, and maybe a new look to the program, so much potential in this old program.

@Astrxration
Copy link

what bandwidth is used for? Didn't get it yet

@jagt jagt merged commit 01aeeff into jagt:master Apr 24, 2021
@jagt
Copy link
Owner

jagt commented Apr 24, 2021

I'll merge this for now and try cut a new release soon.

@jagt
Copy link
Owner

jagt commented May 9, 2021

@skywind3000 I've uploaded a new release here:
https://github.com/jagt/clumsy/releases/tag/0.3rc3

Since I'm not actively using clumsy can you help trying it out if you use it? Many thanks!

Also I just noticed that your PR's user isn't linked with your github account, so it won't show in the repo contributors. If that matters to you you can submit the PR again with a linked account. I'll merge it so it would show up.

@Astrxration
Copy link

Astrxration commented May 12, 2021 via email

@mijagourlay
Copy link

I'd love to exercise this functionality. Any updates on how testing went and whether a new release might happen soon?

@deescuderoo
Copy link

@jagt @skywind3000 This functionality is amazing. This has been extremely useful for my purpose: I run some code in WSL1 and I need to benchmark it with different network settings, which include both latency and bandwith limitations. Clumsy is the only tool I found that made it work, for which I'm very thankful.

I just want to ask, why measuring bandwith in Kilobit per second? More standard rates go in the order of Mbps no?

Either way, I'm very thankful.

@tmphealthtrack
Copy link

Tried out 0.3rc3 and had it working without problems.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

9 participants