From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net [64.139.1.69]) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82E29201B52 for ; Thu, 10 May 2012 01:30:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from shuksan (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6AE5800037; Thu, 10 May 2012 01:30:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Mailer: exmh version 2.7.2 01/07/2005 with nmh-1.3 To: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net From: Hal Murray Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 01:30:02 -0700 Message-Id: <20120510083002.A6AE5800037@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net> Cc: Hal Murray Subject: Re: [Bloat] The challenge 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: Thu, 10 May 2012 08:30:03 -0000 > It is counter-intuitive to keep a queue filled with packets that you might > drop later - as an engineer you tend to think it is more efficient to drop a > packet *before* it starts to consume space in your precious queue. This is > a good deal of what needs to be solved in wireless drivers ... On the other hand, if your problem is buffer bloat, maybe the queue space isn't so precious. Yes, I too tend to think that way, but maybe it will sink in if I see a few reminders. Thanks. -- These are my opinions. I hate spam.