Re: [Bloat] First draft of complete "Bufferbloat And You" enclosed.

[Eric Raymond <esr@thyrsus.com>]

Dave Täht <d@taht.net>:
> The only paragraph that stood out as a cut target was the one on NN. 
> A sentence, a passing reference, would suffice. NN, like sex, tends to
> jolt a limbic system in the wrong direction from rationality. 

Sorry, which one is that?  I want to be sure we're talking about the
same thing, as I'm not currently using the phrase "network neutrality"
anywhere.
 
> Aside from that I agree that the last section needs to be slightly more,
> well, bleak. There is plenty of work left to do. A lot of it is tedious.
> A lot of is simple. Some of it requires theoretical breakthroughs.

Specify, please.  Some such specification needs to be part of our
narrative overview, even if it doesn't stay in the main overview 
document.

> The fourth item simply isn't true (enough). Work is being done. (Lots)
> More people working on the problems identified so far would be great.

"Fourth item"?  You mean the assertion that it's all software?  If tht's it,
what sorts of hardware need to change?  I was counting router firmware
as software because it can be upgraded; is that wrong?

> A goal for me (at least) for these projects is to see typical Internet
> latencies move from seconds - as measured in the US - worse elsewhere -
> drop closer to the speed of light in cable - ms - two orders of
> magnitude improvement. It will be a better internet experience for
> everyone.

Should this goal be in the overview?

> Also I note the "less hard" section can stand alone - as a call to
> action - with pointers to specifics (bulleted list! Agg!)

That's true.  I'm not going to break it out yet, though, as I think
it's valuable to have the whole overview document achieve coherence and topic
completeness before I explode it to subpages.  

(One obvious failure mode if I don't do that is that the document
could bloat without it being easy to notice.)

> My thought is that this piece is still WAY too long. And it could use
> some graphics. (And PSA music)

I took out your image cookies because I consider them an instance of the
better being an enemy of the good.  When we have an artist/animator, I'll work
with him enthusiastically.  Until then, makes no sense to optimize the
document design for a capability we don't have.

As for way too long...I have mixed feelings.  On the one hand, I do
intend to edit for conciseness.  On the other hand, there needs to be
*some* overview that is topic-complete, and that implies letting it be
as long as the content requires.  If I don't write that here and now,
I'll just have to do it another time under another guise.

> What's the elevator pitch?

The first two paragraphs.  I'm going to add a third that says "Here's
the one-sentence version of the problem...", but that has to be
*very* carefully crafted.
-- 
		<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/">Eric S. Raymond</a>