Re: [Bloat] Updated Bufferbloat Test

[Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ca>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1151 bytes --]


Sina Khanifar <sina@waveform.com> wrote:
    > I think that given this limitation of browser-based tests, maybe the
    > users you have in mind are not our target audience. Our goal is to make
    > an easy-to-use bufferbloat test "for the rest of us." For
    > technically-minded gamers, running flent will likely give much better
    > results. I'd love for it to be otherwise, so we may try to tinker with
    > things to see if we can get CPU usage down and simultaneously deal with
    > the UDP question below.

I think that your goals are good.

In many cases around here, the higher speed connections are also more bloated,
and the challenge is convincing a home owner that they will get better
interactive performance on a VDSL2 than a FTTH, if they upgrade their router.
(This is particularly true if their wifi is slower than their downlink, and
also bloated)

It's about quality over quantity.

--
]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh networks [
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        |    IoT architect   [
]     mcr@sandelman.ca  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on rails    [


[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 487 bytes --]