From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-la0-x22f.google.com (mail-la0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::22f]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 54A70201ACC for ; Sun, 14 Sep 2014 09:57:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-la0-f47.google.com with SMTP id mc6so3357933lab.6 for ; Sun, 14 Sep 2014 09:57:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=Z0q2nUyQapfBJms1OoEWo7ZP3JxHvA+Fvuckn7SVmms=; b=zP8gjA0DleifWNMSxWvzF9+QhTZ1V9BfDZGUvMasBqfiC/UX7arWHyExP5MvkYN50D 857Bt2A7xH4ak9Khwinu3Nvv8YnZYpqwOTkLXW5neZfwsXbgqW1JqwHYVwc2XXlDcyiM /725ALaEVcJZj2eRjbBRJAMVG/hASI6CO68yqF7k2b7oSsn+5uPspGmHiA8CmSPZcZ8V xrusdd8igfG6Nw6mG1HzPzlQgFZ9+HwCTEIsYWILX3A7Xm77gus2EPpEWKmdmbFhVwOS 1qCix+NuScAEttweAIIG971T6U6qnmb3F5NWN4oKlbFZg9/krp8QCOHE2iLs2R2f50Yb GLYg== X-Received: by 10.112.171.202 with SMTP id aw10mr4863056lbc.52.1410713835209; Sun, 14 Sep 2014 09:57:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bass.home.chromatix.fi (87-93-10-22.bb.dnainternet.fi. [87.93.10.22]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id my10sm3430043lbb.9.2014.09.14.09.57.13 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 14 Sep 2014 09:57:14 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Jonathan Morton In-Reply-To: <1AF70E51-A60F-47C1-AF90-9B1E6030227C@pnsol.com> Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2014 19:57:11 +0300 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <5CFDFA23-3212-4B78-8D9F-09B248AFBE4A@gmail.com> References: <20140913194126.5B0D1406062@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net> <20418644-AB62-43AE-A09E-5F85ED42DBF4@gmx.de> <1AF70E51-A60F-47C1-AF90-9B1E6030227C@pnsol.com> To: Neil Davies X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085) Cc: Hal Murray , bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net Subject: Re: [Bloat] Measuring Latency 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: Sun, 14 Sep 2014 16:57:46 -0000 On 14 Sep, 2014, at 5:31 pm, Neil Davies wrote: > This is not actually true - you can measure one-way delays without = completely accurately synchronised clocks (they have to be reasonably = precise, not accurate) - see CERN thesis at http://goo.gl/ss6EBq I read the abstract of that, and came away with the distinct impression = that I wouldn't learn anything from reading the rest of the paper. Not = that there *isn't* good information there, but that it's most likely not = in a form that I can digest. And that means it's probably impractical to implement on a consumer = broadband test. Timestamps - sure, why not - but I don't yet see what = you could do with them. > It is possible, with appropriate measurements, to construct arguments = that make marketeers salivate (or the appropriate metaphor) - you can = compare the relative effects of technology, location and instantaneous = congestion. See slideshare at http://goo.gl/6vytmD I'm sure those must be a different breed of marketing types than I have = in mind. There are major ISPs who claim that 3% packet loss "is not a = fault" - on an idle wire line, not wireless, not congested. They are = all about sales and retention by brute force and semi-monopoly position, = not by genuinely providing superior service. Hence why we have to turn to the external consumer-oriented = organisations, the speed-test sites among them. They will have to serve = as *our* marketing tool. - Jonathan Morton