From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-14-ewr.dyndns.com (mxout-097-ewr.mailhop.org [216.146.33.97]) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56F042E015D for ; Sun, 20 Mar 2011 07:42:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scan-11-ewr.mailhop.org (scan-11-ewr.local [10.0.141.229]) by mail-14-ewr.dyndns.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C72E09CB82A for ; Sun, 20 Mar 2011 14:42:27 +0000 (UTC) X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) X-Mail-Handler: MailHop by DynDNS X-Originating-IP: 209.85.215.43 Received: from mail-ew0-f43.google.com (mail-ew0-f43.google.com [209.85.215.43]) by mail-14-ewr.dyndns.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5B839CB4AA for ; Sun, 20 Mar 2011 14:42:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ewy20 with SMTP id 20so1566057ewy.16 for ; Sun, 20 Mar 2011 07:42:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:subject:mime-version:content-type:from :in-reply-to:date:cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references :to:x-mailer; bh=3bpfaN/qgA7zxc7+kBduVNr21NG9dgZGNLWKyGTJB5k=; b=RANxeSHeC4HT1LcmmJhe0wkANFmEo86hlI5YM1+2Y0ABs5OnCoCca3+E/p9dh2tDFt iciaLZM2qBJstGTi8pi0jnq2lUFMRcTgXv0m5eEoA2ajYFWycO7YkHVoavlk69z404T9 3xYAC/fdQge8SN5OORNbFE784JRU7aY/nhMQk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; b=q8yh17RLFLFV7Hf4bGA1y2ZPRBD4UUjESI9zJ6Q+Jmdt8pynFn3lhDGEDTzSwnK8t0 p++42GD7Iu1Xlq7irpRfD5zaS0G7DcuEYZLfjKBEV0UJTpCwQSxGzn1C++DUiGEGny0f VHoQyRUYaUVw287gsoUCWqA/shzPjogh2iPu4= Received: by 10.213.23.90 with SMTP id q26mr1254505ebb.102.1300632142908; Sun, 20 Mar 2011 07:42:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.239.42] (xdsl-83-150-84-172.nebulazone.fi [83.150.84.172]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id x54sm1254061eeh.19.2011.03.20.07.42.22 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 20 Mar 2011 07:42:22 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [Bloat] Progress with latency-under-load tool Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Jonathan Morton In-Reply-To: Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2011 16:42:20 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <4671C30E-2AAA-4250-8ACB-AE9EF2399988@gmail.com> References: <0D59AD34-AA64-4376-BB8E-58C5D378F488@gmail.com> <4D829B58.1070601@swin.edu.au> To: Pedro Tumusok X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082) Cc: Bloat-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-BeenThere: bloat-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers working on AQM, device drivers, and networking stacks" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2011 14:42:28 -0000 On 20 Mar, 2011, at 4:33 pm, Pedro Tumusok wrote: >> Horrible, isn't it? I deliberately left these machines with standard = configurations in order to show that. >>=20 > Is there any point in running this on a CPE? Or would it be better to > have it for host to host connections? Some CPE is multifunctional, eg. fileserver, webcache... for those = types it is definitely worthwhile. Otherwise, the CPE is just another component of the network between two = hosts, but an important one because it often controls the bottleneck (in = at least the upload direction). You culd therefore productively modify = the CPE's device drivers or network stack, and then retest it using = ordinary hosts. - Jonathan