From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lf0-x22e.google.com (mail-lf0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::22e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4050B3B2A2 for ; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 00:38:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-lf0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id x79so117717205lff.0 for ; Wed, 12 Oct 2016 21:38:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=vPxyncf682cRqVKEnzMlT9wwb34bpnHWYDob5LvxYWU=; b=ZHttTuP/Pg/xV5T1vD8UjTlN+D+QpnhyIzqo7vvmKHnzIjN97KsY/iOLpbZePL/2U7 M7gENdXFo8w/sTP7DuNF3lAI9vqK82dNprZwn+IK0lGCTAnx98B2QKnh1CLrn+ib6VFL js3t/yMYiBjcysbiRKbSha/YL22juLxWteiMdGhwIoNYuRy9uiPd4+nK2ZHVutn3WX4E NgqpUzXoi1gkWYH6wLs/SyFVwlbCqyBSwn3+dHZJtlz+S1BqpP06/apPstg7ataGVAMm skUf/vaWspHpe8X9OjP/5yX/yW2h6n//tYadWh4f+rFjlFR5vXDPGQYgBudKyXqsxSOq QsMA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=vPxyncf682cRqVKEnzMlT9wwb34bpnHWYDob5LvxYWU=; b=TmEC4ho8a2xgEH5LnG+SGW90lxzVi1OfY7+mEXHeIqWf7s0v4ZTrlAJ7+mfjAZxFUQ 2ChAfuxK8H2KUU2pT4YS3V8KJZY7ey1LP3iCpYzzeL8zqcacTbodY+F8T5KvUvqC7ddc bAkSYoBSn6ie52QH0BPFpO4IeoTkKkkDcx/06AONbTQfyNy4A/MUuab8OzHx8CAMhVAq 9uMxpjbuDFhJg73KmGrYSXTNS/+G+gY/Nt3o5HzwX7UpRG3dUk8EwcRxmcBW0abNXU8S i+spG+aYXQSz9NO6lujj9+bxUb9+UoHH3d+cBtCYiW+SXddsYW5iz9i3t5fQ2+7um9EX BlsQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AA6/9Rk8clhbNfdBZAvQeJ+oELqyF27zy6mVd5IRM3q2oYk0IrbNA5wLBcZkptFVbBid9A== X-Received: by 10.25.208.11 with SMTP id h11mr6628327lfg.111.1476333480986; Wed, 12 Oct 2016 21:38:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.100.13] (37-33-90-35.bb.dnainternet.fi. [37.33.90.35]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g92sm3014269lji.1.2016.10.12.21.37.59 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 12 Oct 2016 21:38:00 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) From: Jonathan Morton In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2016 07:37:58 +0300 Cc: jb , bloat Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <28B61FA2-78D8-4B1C-B701-2F25A4E30FE7@gmail.com> References: To: Dave Taht X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) Subject: Re: [Bloat] grading bloat better X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2016 04:38:02 -0000 > On 13 Oct, 2016, at 06:22, Dave Taht wrote: >=20 > I still might quibble, but a trimmed mean makes more sense than just a = mean. >=20 > Problem I always have is bloat is biased always towards the end of a = test. Here, > at 1gbit, it took nearly 20 seconds to start going boom. Maybe we need > to invent a new distribution (The bloat distribution? The TCP > distribution)... Perhaps the 90th percentile would be relevant - the median is simply the = 50th percentile. Taking the 90th avoids counting true flukes, but also = captures the idea that intermittently high latency is in fact = noticeable. - Jonathan Morton