From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.perfora.net (mout.perfora.net [74.208.4.197]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mout.perfora.net", Issuer "Thawte SSL CA" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9F15421F6B4 for ; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 04:33:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from J4 (c-68-50-226-187.hsd1.md.comcast.net [68.50.226.187]) by mrelay.perfora.net (node=mreueus001) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0MLxKE-1XV3871t1A-007kTB; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 13:32:59 +0200 From: "Jerry Jongerius" To: "'Sebastian Moeller'" References: <000001cfbefe$69194c70$3b4be550$@duckware.com> <000901cfc2c2$c21ae460$4650ad20$@duckware.com> <4A89264B-36C5-4D1F-9E5E-33F2B42C364E@gmail.com> <002201cfc2e4$565c1100$03143300$@duckware.com> In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2014 07:33:00 -0400 Message-ID: <000301cfc37d$0002b720$00082560$@duckware.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Content-Language: en-us Thread-Index: AQFFVy+FAO2HJAXNGbNNrLY/R/b/6gGg5QYjATtzUJsCM/8plgJDZN5dAwhNtMwCIVqEupyYXySg X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:FdENd62bQVOc7HlAjf9JJD4osWIBZRRC/vf+G0zSDDS Rfh5RK+2Ssudk/5I9NeI4O9FggSq2GtVAWDQPB/XU4gxz/30Vx ZjJnDxo5wJGDEB+zK2JQr4dTIwWd8tXyA8ervmxquZ5RC0gLRP CxDo72f4TdwHzEAB1BxFGw3NrjKAp1yC7b/9ufdxqSD4cf2P1o ddRIzFs2Pv89ucbIwQismrLHZyAQ+Va479bzPhXu/WxlyeZF6R 28ls2u/dHQJUm9pcIHDXSzbf9xCZ5feCPfAOOZSu6EC3t9jqlO PVOqok8PEC9K0ObKAjRdP0+na+CCNQY1XjFE6GCKzuTgb6kA0v 6C73WsJ8RknAaTLj9pJc0TgClR+trEKtc6KJb+Qko X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1; Cc: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net Subject: Re: [Bloat] The Dark Problem with AQM in the Internet? X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2014 11:33:00 -0000 > Okay that is interesting, Could I convince you to try to enable SACK > on the server and test whether you still see the catastrophic results? > And/or try another tcp variant instead of westwood+, like the default cubic. Would love to, but can not. I have read only access to settings on that server.