From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-la0-x22e.google.com (mail-la0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::22e]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0619721F3BE for ; Sun, 19 Apr 2015 13:53:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by lagv1 with SMTP id v1so113510320lag.3 for ; Sun, 19 Apr 2015 13:53:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=4iamGaKixm9qqJm3gGwixhtr3r7AHX444sI5l4o8BOs=; b=tqvD4D1ysKtWHR8wmoqfmM8w5nAm1o2c8+TfDmkLc57lPNv6l7rtIZlt1KAYlS5Iu2 y10wCfn5+SompVHTpaqhuOp4qNIsQKaVCcjC5ttWbxkkBfhEzlCX9BHuMPElbbBptzfV qikkW81nLgANPtFKsSwotRS/YVm1KHIeDIfQ7MiwZrb93L7Vihfi7G1Uj7wl4FGQeWck fbhmvusbGs64BDcCN7rFVGK/Ok7n+l63E17+jIRO4uH3PO4gC8+xbyPU6DIRrANCKz4f +jdNoSWF8g51p/nsJHxtN6ixwqixd8pXJHgA6mUJfWNgsWS1W7oKmOq4PBEHbSyguEzZ XMHg== X-Received: by 10.152.42.171 with SMTP id p11mr13028821lal.57.1429476819707; Sun, 19 Apr 2015 13:53:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bass.home.chromatix.fi (188-67-141-134.bb.dnainternet.fi. [188.67.141.134]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id ew6sm3137716lbc.40.2015.04.19.13.53.30 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 19 Apr 2015 13:53:38 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2098\)) From: Jonathan Morton In-Reply-To: <8E4F61CA-4274-4414-B4C0-F582167D66D6@gmx.de> Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2015 23:53:13 +0300 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <2C987A4B-7459-43C1-A49C-72F600776B00@gmail.com> References: <75C1DDFF-FBD2-4825-A167-92DFCF6A7713@gmail.com> <8AD4493E-EA21-496D-923D-B4257B078A1C@gmx.de> <8E4F61CA-4274-4414-B4C0-F582167D66D6@gmx.de> To: Sebastian Moeller X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2098) Cc: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net Subject: Re: [Bloat] DSLReports Speed Test has latency measurement built-in 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: Sun, 19 Apr 2015 20:54:10 -0000 >>>> Frequency readouts are probably more accessible to the latter. >>>=20 >>> The frequency domain more accessible to laypersons? I have my = doubts ;) >>=20 >> Gamers, at least, are familiar with =93frames per second=94 and how = that corresponds to their monitor=92s refresh rate. =20 >=20 > I am sure they can easily transform back into time domain to get = the frame period ;) . I am partly kidding, I think your idea is great = in that it is a truly positive value which could lend itself to being = used in ISP/router manufacturer advertising, and hence might work in the = real work; on the other hand I like to keep data as =93raw=94 as = possible (not that ^(-1) is a transformation worthy of being called data = massage). >=20 >> The desirable range of latencies, when converted to Hz, happens to be = roughly the same as the range of desirable frame rates. >=20 > Just to play devils advocate, the interesting part is time or = saving time so seconds or milliseconds are also intuitively = understandable and can be easily added ;) Such readouts are certainly interesting to people like us. I have no = objection to them being reported alongside a frequency readout. But I = think most people are not interested in =93time savings=94 measured in = milliseconds; they=92re much more aware of the minute- and hour-level = time savings associated with greater bandwidth. - Jonathan Morton