Re: [Bloat] ultrafast broadband conference june 27-30

[Jan Ceuleers <jan.ceuleers@gmail.com>]

On 18/06/16 12:24, Jonathan Morton wrote:
>> So it seems that you and I agree that it's not G.fast itself that is
>> bloated, but the lack of proper buffer management in certain (most?) DSL
>> modems, regardless of whether they support G.fast or some other flavour
>> of DSL.
> 
> Right.  We’re hoping that G.fast, being a new link technology, has
> taken on board some of the extensive research into buffer sizing and
> management, in typical device implementations.  But we’re not holding
> our breath - the industry is rather stubborn on this point.

We're still not on the same page. So let me again try to decode what you
(and perhaps Dave) are saying:

Either you perceive the problem to be located in the link technology
(i.e. DSL generally or only specific flavours of it). If this is the
case what needs to be fixed is the standard so that implementations
thereof will improve.

Or else you perceive the problem to be located in the CPE that implement
DSL, but in the layer above the DSL link layer. In this case what needs
to be fixed is those implementations, probably starting by the reference
firmware written by chipset vendors.

I think it's the latter. If it's the former then indeed don't hold your
breath because the standardisation is done and dusted.