* [Bloat] Is bufferbloat a privacy issue?
@ 2018-07-19 16:44 Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2018-07-19 16:51 ` Dave Taht
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen @ 2018-07-19 16:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bloat
This was presented at today's maprg session at the IETF:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/102/materials/slides-102-maprg-is-bufferbloat-a-privacy-issue-brian-trammell-00
-Toke
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bloat] Is bufferbloat a privacy issue?
2018-07-19 16:44 [Bloat] Is bufferbloat a privacy issue? Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
@ 2018-07-19 16:51 ` Dave Taht
2018-07-19 18:52 ` Luca Muscariello
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Dave Taht @ 2018-07-19 16:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen; +Cc: bloat
hahaha. Aside from their last slide not recommending fq, that was an
enjoyable read. fq in this case (but I would deprioritize ping
responses slightly in the general case) makes the actual observed load
even more invisible.
I think traceroute would have been a better tool for this study.
and smokeping remains a very useful tool for those that can deploy it.
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 9:44 AM Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@toke.dk> wrote:
>
> This was presented at today's maprg session at the IETF:
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/102/materials/slides-102-maprg-is-bufferbloat-a-privacy-issue-brian-trammell-00
>
> -Toke
> _______________________________________________
> Bloat mailing list
> Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
--
Dave Täht
CEO, TekLibre, LLC
http://www.teklibre.com
Tel: 1-669-226-2619
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bloat] Is bufferbloat a privacy issue?
2018-07-19 16:51 ` Dave Taht
@ 2018-07-19 18:52 ` Luca Muscariello
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Luca Muscariello @ 2018-07-19 18:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Taht; +Cc: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen, bloat
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1343 bytes --]
Good point. Flow isolation gives some kind of “privacy”.
But I guess this is not the worse privacy violation one would be concerned
about in today Internet.
On Thu 19 Jul 2018 at 12:52, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:
> hahaha. Aside from their last slide not recommending fq, that was an
> enjoyable read. fq in this case (but I would deprioritize ping
> responses slightly in the general case) makes the actual observed load
> even more invisible.
>
> I think traceroute would have been a better tool for this study.
>
> and smokeping remains a very useful tool for those that can deploy it.
>
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 9:44 AM Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@toke.dk>
> wrote:
> >
> > This was presented at today's maprg session at the IETF:
> >
> >
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/102/materials/slides-102-maprg-is-bufferbloat-a-privacy-issue-brian-trammell-00
> >
> > -Toke
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bloat mailing list
> > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
> > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
>
>
>
> --
>
> Dave Täht
> CEO, TekLibre, LLC
> http://www.teklibre.com
> Tel: 1-669-226-2619
> _______________________________________________
> Bloat mailing list
> Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2352 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2018-07-19 18:52 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2018-07-19 16:44 [Bloat] Is bufferbloat a privacy issue? Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2018-07-19 16:51 ` Dave Taht
2018-07-19 18:52 ` Luca Muscariello
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox