Re: [Bloat] Open Source Speed Test (was fast.com - Netflix's speed monitoring)

[grenville armitage <garmitage@swin.edu.au>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1087 bytes --]



On 08/27/2016 11:06, David Lang wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Aug 2016, Kathleen Nichols wrote:
>
     [..]
>>> so you can call it large queues instead of large buffers, but the result
>>> is that packets end up being 'in transit' for a long time.
>>
>> No, a large queue is a bunch of packets waiting in a queue (which is contained in a buffer). A large buffer with zero or a small number of packets in it is not going to result in packets being in transit for a long time.
     [..]
>
> I don't understand what you are trying to call out by trying to change the terminology.

I think you're almost in violent agreement, except that Kathy is differentiating between the space set aside for holding between 0 and N packets (or bytes) of data for delivery (a /buffer/) and an instance of packets queued up to a particular depth in a buffer (a /queue/) . Given that terminology, a bottleneck may implement a large buffer, but with proper congestion signals (or eg. delay-based congestion inference by end points) there might only ever be small queues build up in the (large) buffer.

cheers,
gja


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2082 bytes --]