NDT-DEV email list created

[Sebastian Kostuch <>]

Hi
Will, I have merged your last fixes into trunk so they will be contained 
within
new release :).
Aaron, keeping in mind what you have said I have changed version numbers
to be release candidate and tagged this. Such tagged version is now ready
for being tested by outside folks. I hope that test stage will perform 
smoothly
and we would release new NDT version ASAP!
Also I have updated wiki pages to match new protocol changes.

Regards
Sebastian Kostuch

On 18.06.2014 23:00, Will Hawkins wrote:
> Aaron,
>
> Thanks for the information! We (M-Lab) are especially interested in
>
> a) having the code "checked" to make sure that the measurements are
> still valid
>
> and
>
> b) having a release to deploy on the platform.
>
> Having said that, what is the best way to prepare a release candidate to
> start the process rolling? Are you able to help verify the measurements
> made with the new version of the tool? Will you be able to help,
> generally, with the release process (since, I mean, you're awesome!)?
>
> Thanks again for your email!
> Will
>
> On 06/18/2014 04:46 PM, Aaron Brown wrote:
> > Hi Sebastian,
> >
> > To do a full release, NDT will need to go through a release candidate process 
> > to ensure that outside folks have a chance to test it before something gets 
> > labeled as “released”. Beyond that, NDT will need verified to make sure that 
> > something didn’t break with existing clients (important since this is a less 
> > common use-case). The upgrade process needs to be verified as well to make 
> > sure that it doesn’t break an existing installation when someone goes to 
> > upgrade.
> >
> > As part of the upgrade procedure above, the RPMs will need updated with any 
> > changes in the codebase since that’s the primary method folks use to install 
> > NDT (the vast majority of NDT installations in the wild are installed as part 
> > of the perfSONAR Performance Toolkit). This procedure will need tested to 
> > make sure that both new installs, and existing installs work as expected.
> >
> > Once there’s a final release, the NDT RPMs will get added to the Internet2 
> > RPM repository (where the Toolkit users get their RPMs from), and the source 
> > tarball will be added to the Internet2 site at software.internet2.edu). 
> > Presumably, this link could be used as canonical for NDT since any linked 
> > location is arbitrary from the end user perspective.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Aaron
> >
> > On Jun 18, 2014, at 6:04 AM, Sebastian Kostuch 
> > <>
> >  wrote:
> >
> > > Hi again,
> > > new NDT version is coming soon, however there are last changes to be performed
> > > before this. I have merged all changes to release into trunk, tested and 
> > > fixed individual
> > > small bugs. Next step will be to update our wiki pages to match new version 
> > > which I will
> > > be working on in nearest time.
> > > However I wanted to ask two last questions to you:
> > > 1. So far new release package has been published in "downloads" section of 
> > > google code
> > > project but recently Google has disabled this option. Therefore should we 
> > > place such archive
> > > in some external source like Google drive where users could directly download 
> > > this (and update
> > > wiki with such link)? Or maybe just publish link to release tagged revision?
> > >
> > > 2. Also what about updating NDT links/software on another sites? I know that 
> > > it will be performed
> > > on M-lab but what about Internet2 website?
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Sebastian
> > >
> > > On 18.06.2014 09:06, Sebastian Kostuch wrote:
> > > > Hi Will
> > > > indeed these changes results in higher speeds (I was able to get ~760 mbps
> > > > which is quite similar to yours). Also I have checked flash client as 
> > > > background
> > > > for new JS UI and both speeds are being updated correctly in real-time. This 
> > > > is
> > > > really great work! Thanks for this. I have merged these changes into trunk so
> > > > they would be also present in new release.
> > > > Also as you probably have noticed I have fixed compilation error when using
> > > > web100 so I closed appropriated issue related to this.
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > Sebastian
> > > >
> > > > On 17.06.2014 22:52, Will Hawkins wrote:
> > > > > Hello Sebastian and Aaron (and MLab'ers CC'd),
> > > > >
> > > > > We found a way to juice the Flash client and achieve the performance
> > > > > necessary to accurately measure high-speed network connections.
> > > > >
> > > > > The change is in r1082.
> > > > >
> > > > > The solution was counterintuitive (at least for me). Instead of
> > > > > attempting to read data from the socket as quickly as possible, the
> > > > > TestS2C class just gets out of the way for the duration of the test. It
> > > > > registers only for the "socket close" event. The runtime has the
> > > > > necessary speed to keep up with the network.
> > > > >
> > > > > The only problem with this method is keeping the user interface
> > > > > up-to-date on progress throughout the test. Sebastian, this is where I
> > > > > need you to double check. I believe that the code in r1082 properly
> > > > > updates _s2cByteCount in the appropriate spot for those real-time
> > > > > updates (specifically onSpeedUpdate). But, please double check!
> > > > >
> > > > > We were able to measure a connection at ~ 775 mbps using the Flash
> > > > > client, but it would be great to have as many people test this as
> > > > > possible. To do so, you can use a pre-compiled version at
> > > > >
> > > > > http://files.opentechinstitute.org/~hawkinsw/flash/test.html
> > > > >
> > > > > On a separate, but related note, please also review r1083 for inclusion
> > > > > in the NDT release. This change allows the client to re-query JS for the
> > > > > test's hostname just before launching a test. This gives the wrapper
> > > > > page the opportunity to do a AJAX query to determine the test's
> > > > > hostname. This is important for MLab because we do dynamic server
> > > > > selection using a web-based API.
> > > > >
> > > > > I am eager to hear whether you have success with these changes or not. I
> > > > > hope you do!
> > > > >
> > > > > Will
> > > > >
> > > > > On 06/17/2014 10:53 AM, Will Hawkins wrote:
> > > > > > Just FYI: I believe that we have happened on to an actual solution for
> > > > > > the "limit" to the performance of the S2C test. I am going to implement
> > > > > > it today and do some testing.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If possible, could we hold out on doing a release for a little while
> > > > > > pending this investigation?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Will
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 06/16/2014 01:50 AM, Sebastian Kostuch wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi Will,
> > > > > > > what you mentioned seems reasonable. Would it be possible to merge these
> > > > > > > needed
> > > > > > > changes into trunk in nearest time so we could make new release for
> > > > > > > example tomorrow
> > > > > > > or the day after tomorrow?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > Sebastian
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 13.06.2014 17:36, Will Hawkins wrote:
> > > > > > > > Sebastian,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks for sending this out! We (at MLab) are very interested in
> > > > > > > > deploying a new version of the code so this 'release' looks like a
> > > > > > > > good place to fit together! :-) In other words, we (again, MLab) are
> > > > > > > > definitely going to do what you said in 3!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I am out of the office, but I wanted to quickly respond to point 2.
> > > > > > > > See below!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks again for driving this process forward!!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Will
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On 6/13/14, 4:47 AM, Sebastian Kostuch wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hello,
> > > > > > > > > NDT has been updated recently with some major changes (like
> > > > > > > > > MSG_EXTENDED_LOGIN,
> > > > > > > > > json support, new JS UI) so as I have mentioned in some earlier mail
> > > > > > > > > that would be probably
> > > > > > > > > good time to make new release. I have few questions related to this:
> > > > > > > > > 1. New JS UI would fit well within this new release, however changes
> > > > > > > > > related to this are still
> > > > > > > > > on work branches and need review. Any feedback would be very
> > > > > > > > > appreciated. These are
> > > > > > > > > following issues: 129, 132, 133.
> > > > > > > > > 2. Is Issue144 (URLLoader to flash) supposed to be contained also in
> > > > > > > > > nearest release version?
> > > > > > > > > If yes, then how does progress with work on this look like? If I recall
> > > > > > > > > correctly then you, Will,
> > > > > > > > > mentioned that they are well tested and thus almost ready, right?
> > > > > > > > Some of these are still up for debate. I am going to forward an email
> > > > > > > > that I just sent to the MLab team with an update on the conundrum
> > > > > > > > around the HTTP test to give you a sense about why they are up for
> > > > > > > > debate.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > But, there are also changes in that branch that *need* to be
> > > > > > > > incorporated into anything that gets released. For instance, r1070.
> > > > > > > > There are parts of r1064 that will have to be integrated no matter
> > > > > > > > what (any of the changes that have to do with splitting start test and
> > > > > > > > finalize test stages).
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Does that make sense?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 3. Along with new release on googlecode what do you think about pushing
> > > > > > > > > these changes also
> > > > > > > > > on M-Lab site? They bring many new features at all.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Looking forward to your answers and I hope that next week could be
> > > > > > > > > celebrated with making
> > > > > > > > > new release of NDT :).
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Kind regards
> > > > > > > > > Sebastian Kostuch