From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <lars@netapp.com>
Received: from mx1.netapp.com (mx1.netapp.com [216.240.18.38])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
	(Client CN "mx1.netapp.com",
	Issuer "VeriSign Class 3 Secure Server CA - G3" (not verified))
	by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 74EA821F184
	for <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>; Fri, 27 Sep 2013 02:06:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.90,991,1371106800"; 
	d="asc'?scan'208";a="281861813"
Received: from vmwexceht01-prd.hq.netapp.com ([10.106.76.239])
	by mx1-out.netapp.com with ESMTP; 27 Sep 2013 02:06:19 -0700
Received: from SACEXCMBX01-PRD.hq.netapp.com ([169.254.2.46]) by
	vmwexceht01-prd.hq.netapp.com ([10.106.76.239]) with mapi id
	14.03.0123.003; Fri, 27 Sep 2013 02:06:18 -0700
From: "Eggert, Lars" <lars@netapp.com>
To: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
Thread-Topic: [iccrg] [aqm] [Bloat]   AQM deployment status?
Thread-Index: AQHOuiT+6Z4ZE6ZDyEKUG5qm/1Q3vpnYObmAgAEiaoCAAGaRgA==
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2013 09:06:16 +0000
Message-ID: <6F314D4E-A03B-4273-A79B-EB14EDCF8274@netapp.com>
References: <CAEjQQ5U2atKwXvucMKNHsRZ29RinpKMN4rZEvUGOAqNxxEvLBg@mail.gmail.com>
	<C0611F522A6FA9498A044C36073E49656D9185F2@US70UWXCHMBA01.zam.alcatel-lucent.com>
	<FB9F71A5-C19E-405D-A598-BC704C38B3AA@netapp.com>
	<20130925143510.GA6191@sesse.net>
	<C0611F522A6FA9498A044C36073E49656D91899C@US70UWXCHMBA01.zam.alcatel-lucent.com>
	<alpine.DEB.2.02.1309252118590.32315@uplift.swm.pp.se>
	<012C3117EDDB3C4781FD802A8C27DD4F25D8E29B@SACEXCMBX02-PRD.hq.netapp.com>
	<alpine.DEB.2.02.1309270456370.32315@uplift.swm.pp.se>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1309270456370.32315@uplift.swm.pp.se>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
x-originating-ip: [10.106.53.51]
Content-Type: multipart/signed;
	boundary="Apple-Mail=_41B57C59-F127-4060-8440-42921AAD8F8F";
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "Scheffenegger, Richard" <rs@netapp.com>, "iccrg@irtf.org" <iccrg@irtf.org>,
	"aqm@ietf.org" <aqm@ietf.org>, bloat <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: [Bloat] [iccrg] [aqm]    AQM deployment status?
X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13
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: Fri, 27 Sep 2013 09:06:28 -0000

--Apple-Mail=_41B57C59-F127-4060-8440-42921AAD8F8F
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii

On Sep 27, 2013, at 4:59, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> wrote:
> Do you know of simulations or similar that investigates this? I would =
like to understand why having RED on a 3ms buffer depth device makes a =
difference and how much difference it makes.

Because saving 3ms on a path with microsecond latency is a big deal?

Lars

--Apple-Mail=_41B57C59-F127-4060-8440-42921AAD8F8F
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQCVAwUBUkVKidZcnpRveo1xAQI3IQP+IYRen5DWYvJZo5veNkv3q+lW4KHqu6Jb
s0PNV4riR4iTUf+5MqYYjG2xbZ4Qf9wqjnjffiqcj44LXnOVdgsbOT2XWgo9iI9g
uRJC5azgGhRCmWOOAnGk8Q+E3qZSU/govwbQG4jPU9MCsxFWRtU96bZb44mkwVC/
gYEdXUltqR0=
=Z2Rn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Apple-Mail=_41B57C59-F127-4060-8440-42921AAD8F8F--