From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.19]) (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 9C34D3CB56 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2018 10:22:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [10.128.56.3] ([221.162.103.114]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx003 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MC4y8-1fk54d2chk-008rHu; Thu, 23 Aug 2018 16:22:12 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) From: Sebastian Moeller In-Reply-To: <66e2374b-f998-b132-410e-46c9089bb06b@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2018 23:22:07 +0900 Cc: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <360212B1-8411-4ED0-877A-92E59070F518@gmx.de> References: <66e2374b-f998-b132-410e-46c9089bb06b@gmail.com> To: Jan Ceuleers X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:otPWQJHHnh9v2VqtbJ+4RUAXRQEp9DurqNp7XCuR5GOIl9h/aN8 70s8MXPOznbZ2/34SnYQ9D0Qzn+5DwdakFxQgtA/gaZP6aDI+0o7h2Ha5VV5mHglE3etpKs zXsjJDLdjmwDJHeRRngRR1tZ//CJ+POfG/SSIFqlmXrv66hDm4egMbdhBTOVuPKrGfN2+6p s1VdgBK8MpCmsSZZPmkkw== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:YcV57Q0lnVY=:Pn4T306qYDrXcpX4ylsntn HUw+6UBV+2STK2hY3RIl+ABTDz3LJbkvsUx51QbEZdyTP7vbn7JZeI+IZ66z+pg4xNrrOBjkj 6YDrKlS6J1oO3KCTYRleIi6fUfqgRneVQuvU/QgU+yp9u+TojtpjHVlFXhj5rs0k6w0WSK6Ax +O0zhwVR1e4PILb/IFG8CrbNmIjoa7DJyViEpGa1ThAGgIF9TrNrIS3RNyWbx3Z6kXGqDjePk NRHnIseYa/OkDnbiOkzV1mDAX3hv7Qh3+S11vi4aGyFRMVPxVgthUxiQlb5ZdpvP/DwBjVnx8 mDtB55j0TEgNRQYH29dhZIdBBzt6y2wvNkWBPPet9In4QmAqUmS7joTl/qOHBK4qplcI5HkBa 34pE8y74tXw83YGwyspY6cwuCgf/Lb53MyWZkEJo7Yl8ogC4bZHK+NPYxmIcMgwWoXehPYXp9 k7+R0KG2r5M62UxKs6Dx3E+D9iRGi9gwDb142ovbJxcijtWkor/qumWD8F/j7Mz+ouzLJ9LNQ oHbsKbQzPYevngkY0mYqBuaFJEine7ckcNIr8fiJ8DaYx9thIcr4fVGbPlf2TUSh8MiX/Rqtx UwWa8sYRgY9JZ2jjyIyLZDPwFQLaHWI/q0d+NkP8Z3LerjhxuFidhEf69ORA3/y0SKUlz5qUs Xi0a3mdtimmEvG9bMcEG6V80ZL7uZijofaUaQsOyMJOszVqRWckxQ8TmGXHu7Wq3ykwZpn5TV 99LyjTLcdzitPNhB4mfJEdF+g5iQnJRqpaju2Zr1u3MykY1D6f3se8LYmEH1rUI+3y7QFEs2X k/nM0fU Subject: Re: [Bloat] [Cerowrt-devel] beating the drum for BQL 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, 23 Aug 2018 14:22:14 -0000 Hi Jan, > On Aug 23, 2018, at 22:57, Jan Ceuleers = wrote: >=20 > On 23/08/18 15:06, Sebastian Moeller wrote: >> Or we could convince customers to stop buying toy router's that = only work under a severely limited set of circumstances and opt for = devices that pack enough CPU-punch to be actually adequate for modern = internet speed tiers, no? Now if the packet accelerator is jus there to = help save energy for typical cases but the CPU is powerful enough to = handle a modern line with all the bells and whistles customers except, = then I am all for it, but if the packet accelerator is just there to = paper over an anemic CPU... >=20 > Not realistic, and also not environmentally friendly. I unhappily agree with the first (market forces being what they = are); I claim the second is untrue, since I stipulated packet = accelerators as a way save energy and alllowing a competent main CPU to = idle in low power mode, but pack the punch if needed. That sounds more = environmentally sane than the current model in which you have to replace = the incompetent router by a more competent one later... (and my issue is = not that a router needs to last forever, but the e.g. an ISP supplied = router should be able to handle at least the sold plan's bandwidth with = its main CPU...) >=20 > Doing packet forwarding in hardware is much more energy efficient, for > example. So not only is the hardware cheaper, it doesn't generate as > much heat, is cheaper to run, etc. Sure doing less/ a half asses job is less costly than doing it = right, but in the extreme not doing the job at all saves even more = energy ;). And I am not sure we are barking up the right tree here, it = is not that all home CPE are rigorously optimized for low power and = energy saving... my gut feeling is that the only optimizing principle is = cost for the manufacturer/OEM and that causes underpowered CPU that are = packet-accerlerated"-doped to appear to be able to do their job. I might = be wrong though, as I have ISP internal numbers on this issue. Best Regards Sebastian >=20 > Jan > _______________________________________________ > Bloat mailing list > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat