From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <nichols@pollere.com>
Received: from homiemail-a54.g.dreamhost.com (sub4.mail.dreamhost.com
 [69.163.253.135])
 (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 809B73B25E
 for <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>; Sat, 27 Aug 2016 20:14:15 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from homiemail-a54.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by homiemail-a54.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 975E3400E513E;
 Sat, 27 Aug 2016 17:14:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kmnimac.local (unknown [50.136.231.153])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 (Authenticated sender: nichols@pollere.net)
 by homiemail-a54.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 721DA400E513D;
 Sat, 27 Aug 2016 17:14:14 -0700 (PDT)
To: jb <justin@dslr.net>
References: <05056A85-894D-477F-A10D-C912C7D52C2F@gmail.com>
 <448a25be-160f-701e-f56b-b3a33d49cff8@pollere.com>
 <63403b38-94fa-1670-908c-e14573f822a8@gmail.com>
 <8971f9f1-a79b-ce49-f7c4-660a355fdd43@pollere.com>
 <CAH3Ss94EbydWtBxnmjMmXwT=4LAdy5F64RQ+mHekcV3K9BvHNg@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: bloat <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>
From: Kathleen Nichols <nichols@pollere.com>
Message-ID: <5c615f4b-6162-915d-897c-871c3e843ed2@pollere.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2016 17:14:13 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:45.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAH3Ss94EbydWtBxnmjMmXwT=4LAdy5F64RQ+mHekcV3K9BvHNg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Bloat] Bufferbloat test measurements
X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20
Precedence: list
List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat <bloat.lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/options/bloat>,
 <mailto:bloat-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/bloat>
List-Post: <mailto:bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bloat-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat>,
 <mailto:bloat-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2016 00:14:15 -0000


Hi, Justin,
Thanks for the explanations. So the grade is for the user not the ISP?

I just have to point out that the below jumped out at me a bit. A user
can fully use the link bandwidth capacity and not have an unacceptable
latency. After all, that's the goal of AQM. But, yes, there are those
pesky lurking buffers in the path which the user might unhappily
use to their full capacity and then latency can be unacceptable.

	Kathie

On 8/27/16 4:39 PM, jb wrote:
> 
> Generally if a user does not use their connection to full capacity, latency
> is acceptable (but obviously the buffers are still there, lurking).
> Bursts and
> so on can discover them again but the effects are transient.