Re: [Bloat] how much delay is too much delay

[Noah Causin <n0manletter@gmail.com>]

He mentions symptoms of bufferbloat indirectly and states his 
recommended router with QOS from here on.

https://youtu.be/m1Nfxvl8vfc?t=14m36s

It is the Netgear Nighthawk X4S.

https://www.netgear.com/home/products/networking/wifi-routers/R7800.aspx

It uses fq_codel in its QOS implementation.

I'm not sure which models of the Netgear Nighthawk have airtime 
fairness, but I think that is the reason the routers are highly 
acclaimed by users.


On 1/13/2017 6:02 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
>
> https://www.youtube.com/user/xFPxAUTh0r1ty
>
> This channel analyses several online games and how they work 
> networkwise. It seems online games typically "tick" at 30-60Hz in that 
> the game server and user application communicates this often. 60Hz 
> seems to be the "golden standard", and I guess resolution of 17ms is 
> fine for when things are happening.
>
> In gaming they have multiple delay components, one is "input delay" 
> which relates to the time it takes from you for instance press the 
> mouse button, until the game shows that it has responded by showing 
> you result on screen. It seems this is typically 40-60ms, because the 
> game needs to handle the input, send data to the graphics card, which 
> needs to render it, and then it needs to be sent to the monitor. There 
> are of course a lot more than this, but you get the idea.
>
> I don't know what the delay is from mouse-click to when the game knows 
> you clicked, and then can send out this information to the game 
> server, but from what I'm guessing from reading up on the topic, this 
> is in the "less than 10ms" range. So theoretically, the game can send 
> an update to the game server much quicker than it can display on the 
> local screen.
>
> Another data point for instance for the game "Rocket League", is that 
> the highest ranking players have a hard time playing effectively when 
> the user-to-game server "ping" is more than approximately 100ms. I 
> don't know if this is RTT, but considering they're getting around 
> 130ms from a user in Texas to a server in Europe, it seems reasonable 
> that this is RTT.
>
> My reason for bringing this up (again) in the bloat forum, is that 
> these people are exactly the kind of people who are very sensitive to 
> problems that "anti-bloat" solves. If we can come up with a solution 
> that makes it less likely that these people will get "ping spikes" 
> etc, and we can package up something that actually solves this 
> (preferrably something they can go to the store and buy outright), 
> this would be a great way to "market" it. I'm quite sure they'd be 
> interested in making videos about it to make more people aware of the 
> problem.
>
> There are multiple "gaming routers" out there, with "QoS". I have no 
> idea what this "QoS" does. If anyone knows, I'd be very interested in 
> knowing more.
>