From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <moeller0@gmx.de>
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.18])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(Client CN "mout.gmx.net",
	Issuer "TeleSec ServerPass DE-1" (verified OK))
	by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 211A221F45C
	for <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>; Sun, 19 Apr 2015 09:30:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hms-beagle.home.lan ([87.164.165.7]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx003)
	with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MfEZG-1Yyd341jFC-00OqIv;
	Sun, 19 Apr 2015 18:30:24 +0200
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
From: Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>
In-Reply-To: <75C1DDFF-FBD2-4825-A167-92DFCF6A7713@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2015 18:30:23 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <8AD4493E-EA21-496D-923D-B4257B078A1C@gmx.de>
References: <CAH3Ss97f2AY3nB2Lo07h18pmm8yDn9EYw7=ZjRKZRTg66DUEAw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA5684DF-3492-4BED-9AD0-168CEF999DF4@gmx.de>
	<75C1DDFF-FBD2-4825-A167-92DFCF6A7713@gmail.com>
To: Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:TGTA8ChqXvlrQiLJn69phmQMAUVnAGx3YOwf/h3LN2Rx5gZBi7O
	Df07CUrqsLtc/greexwkLoScpROiEx+0s4k9Mtu+AptM7Zi5VFguKrrtDHb3NSoftrjPrwB
	X+/QuMtAEM0Iewy02awxX8wcSGqJ+0FvlgNeFac/ND4cuSWxllRKTTMxHnAQxDqNqHyPgEq
	JN7QV9E23eyVvFwTNeGMA==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;
Cc: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: [Bloat] DSLReports Speed Test has latency measurement built-in
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: Sun, 19 Apr 2015 16:31:04 -0000

Hi Jonathan,

On Apr 19, 2015, at 12:46 , Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com> =
wrote:

>=20
>> On 19 Apr, 2015, at 13:20, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
>>=20
>> Reporting the latency under load as frequency (inverse of delay time) =
would be nice in that higher numbers denote a "better=94 link, but has =
the issue that it is going to be hard to quickly add different latency =
sources/components...
>=20
> Personally I=92d say that this disadvantage matters more to us =
scientists and engineers than to end-users.  Frequency readouts are =
probably more accessible to the latter.

	The frequency domain more accessible to laypersons? I have my =
doubts ;) I like your responsiveness frequency roprt as I tend to call =
it myself, but I more and more think calling the whole thing latency =
cost or latency tax will make everybody understand that it should be =
minimized, plus it allows for easier calculations=85. ;)

Best Regards
	Sebastian


>=20
> - Jonathan Morton
>=20