From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail2.tohojo.dk (mail2.tohojo.dk [77.235.48.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BEE483B25E for ; Sat, 18 Jun 2016 06:51:52 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mail2.tohojo.dk DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 mail2.tohojo.dk 0654040A3A DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=201310; t=1466247111; bh=smbXOZVUsEYwiqleCw/Oypux7DQH5clmlpkgJlljWqE=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=IP9A7wNrBMT0X4UN1mMBCIulECyD0RLn+/XvBIU4hIJg3uxLd/imJ1kbPV/1VWaS2 J8rOl71kOK3+W6JaKFTYnKSMgsMPWjVb+Y4YxB2hW2B49i3QMX+mwbje3fnbAnClzq Pc877tIyBtA+RJBVz+Wapyqh2d4q5mTRJsmkFeb0= Sender: toke@toke.dk Received: by alrua-karlstad.karlstad.toke.dk (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 088ED78E90C; Sat, 18 Jun 2016 12:51:50 +0200 (CEST) From: =?utf-8?Q?Toke_H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= To: Jan Ceuleers Cc: Jonathan Morton , bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net References: <57650074.90106@gmail.com> <57652072.7020708@gmail.com> <5765248F.5000108@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2016 12:51:49 +0200 In-Reply-To: <5765248F.5000108@gmail.com> (Jan Ceuleers's message of "Sat, 18 Jun 2016 12:38:07 +0200") X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Message-ID: <87porevkfu.fsf@toke.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Subject: Re: [Bloat] ultrafast broadband conference june 27-30 X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2016 10:51:52 -0000 Jan Ceuleers writes: > 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. It is indeed the latter. However, it is correlated with DSL technology because the equipment tend to be using binary blobs for drivers that themselves have huge buffers; so even if the device is running Linux, sticking FQ-CoDel on it doesn't do much good without a software rate limiter. And also, most devices are owned by the ISP, so the consumer can't upgrade them anyway. So while it is nothing inherent in the technology per se, in practice it is a fairly safe bet to say "ah, you're on DSL? Well, you are probably suffering from bufferbloat, then". I know of at least one DSL vendor who supposedly has started paying attention after pressure from a clueful ISP; not idea if they started shipping non-bloated products yet. -Toke