From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp26.sms.unimo.it (smtp26.sms.unimo.it [155.185.44.26]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 914EB21F22D for ; Mon, 27 Apr 2015 01:59:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [212.84.39.131] (port=50856 helo=[192.168.15.101]) by smtp26.sms.unimo.it with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1YmetL-0008Mz-3t; Mon, 27 Apr 2015 10:59:51 +0200 From: Paolo Valente Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2015 10:59:48 +0200 To: bloat Message-Id: <3E2406CD-0938-4C1F-B171-247CBB5E4C7D@unimore.it> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) UNIMORE-X-SA-Score: -2.9 Subject: [Bloat] bufferbloat effects on throughput 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: Mon, 27 Apr 2015 09:00:24 -0000 Hi, if I am not missing anything, the information provided on = buffebloat.net, as well as in the documents mentioned on the site, seems = to focus mainly on latency issues. Is this because high latency is the = only serious consequence of bufferbloat? Or are there important = consequences in terms of throughput or throughput fluctuations too? If there are, could anyone please point me to further reading on these = aspects? Thanks, Paolo