From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org [80.91.229.3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0C80321F3DA for ; Sat, 16 May 2015 01:56:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YtXt5-0000qV-VP for bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net; Sat, 16 May 2015 10:56:04 +0200 Received: from host-89-243-98-57.as13285.net ([89.243.98.57]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 16 May 2015 10:56:03 +0200 Received: from alan.christopher.jenkins by host-89-243-98-57.as13285.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 16 May 2015 10:56:03 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net From: Alan Jenkins Date: Sat, 16 May 2015 09:55:57 +0100 Message-ID: <5557061D.8070609@gmail.com> References: <20150515171757.0536e589@urahara> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: host-89-243-98-57.as13285.net User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0 In-Reply-To: <20150515171757.0536e589@urahara> Cc: Jim Gettys Subject: Re: [Bloat] General Bufferbloat Testing Document. 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: Sat, 16 May 2015 08:56:37 -0000 On 16/05/15 01:17, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > On Fri, 15 May 2015 12:16:56 -0400 > Jim Gettys wrote: > >> Even before I knew about the wonderful DSLreports bufferbloat test, I had >> started working on a document to help people like that (e.g. Ookla) >> understand how to do bufferbloat testing. The document also grew a bit >> beyond that topic, by the time it was done.... >> >> The document is at: >> >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1z5NN4WRKQKK-RtxtKR__XIwkybvsKEmunek2Ezdw_90/edit?usp=sharing >> >> Comments welcome. >> >> It's intended long term home is the bufferbloat.net wiki, but I've found >> Google doc's commenting feature really useful. >> - Jim > > Great to see, I think it does a good job of being detailed without overwhelmingly > research oriented. > > What makes you believe SPDY and QUIC will be better than TCP? I know they do > pacing but if they get the rate estimation wrong or get hit by transient congestion > it could have same failing that doomed TCP Vegas. HTTP/2 has working multiplexing. This means you can reduce several simultaneous 'slow start' bursts to one. Yay! c.f. "These transients are caused by normal users in everyday use cases such as routine web surfing, due to embedded images inducing large numbers of TCP connections, and TCP’s initial window and TCP “slow start” (currently unpaced) landing in a single FIFO queue" There's some hope sites will stop "sharding". I.e. stop hosting resources on multiple domains to game how many connections the browser opens. I guess it would let them avoid a round-trip from opening extra secondary connections. Alan