From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from db3outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com (db3ehsobe003.messaging.microsoft.com [213.199.154.141]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.global.frontbridge.com", Issuer "Microsoft Secure Server Authority" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 41FDC200252 for ; Wed, 28 Mar 2012 18:55:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail66-db3-R.bigfish.com (10.3.81.251) by DB3EHSOBE002.bigfish.com (10.3.84.22) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.225.23; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 01:55:18 +0000 Received: from mail66-db3 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail66-db3-R.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B76B630040C for ; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 01:55:18 +0000 (UTC) X-SpamScore: 0 X-BigFish: VPS0(zzzz1202hzz8275dhz31h2a8h668h839h944hd25h) X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:157.56.244.213; KIP:(null); UIP:(null); IPV:NLI; H:CH1PRD0510HT005.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; RD:none; EFVD:NLI Received-SPF: softfail (mail66-db3: transitioning domain of dartware.com does not designate 157.56.244.213 as permitted sender) client-ip=157.56.244.213; envelope-from=richard.e.brown@dartware.com; helo=CH1PRD0510HT005.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ; .outlook.com ; Received: from mail66-db3 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail66-db3 (MessageSwitch) id 1332986116724554_24672; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 01:55:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from DB3EHSMHS004.bigfish.com (unknown [10.3.81.233]) by mail66-db3.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAEF110004C for ; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 01:55:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from CH1PRD0510HT005.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (157.56.244.213) by DB3EHSMHS004.bigfish.com (10.3.87.104) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.225.23; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 01:55:16 +0000 Received: from CH1PRD0510MB381.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([169.254.11.89]) by CH1PRD0510HT005.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.255.150.40]) with mapi id 14.16.0135.002; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 01:55:11 +0000 From: Richard Brown To: "bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net" Thread-Topic: Slashdot! Thread-Index: AQHNDU75ptd7drbGXEGs4UPA3FjMwA== Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 01:55:11 +0000 Message-ID: <96681122-A994-4D0A-9457-3607DA3B025C@intermapper.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.255.150.4] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <1455DD353EE13B4EACAFDDCDE5AA9459@namprd05.prod.outlook.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: dartware.com Subject: [Bloat] Slashdot! X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 01:55:23 -0000 It was good to see bufferbloat mentioned on slashdot... http://linux.slashdot.org/story/12/03/28/1439227/linux-33-making-a-dent-in-= bufferbloat The OP made a fair query: has anyone benchmarked the bql and sfqred that ar= e in the Linux 3.3 kernel? The responses were the typical spread of Slashdot responses: some funny, so= me clueless, some hostile, some way OT. Our own jg gave a nice (and I thought, civil) response to the comment title= d, "oversimplified PR noise ignores decade of research" and that started ou= t,=20 'The bufferbloat "movement" infuriates me because it's light on science and= heavy on publicity. It reminds me of my dad's story about his buddy who tr= ied to make his car go faster by cutting a hole in the firewall underneath = the gas petal so he could push it down further.' http://linux.slashdot.org/= comments.pl?sid=3D2752225&cid=3D39498867 This sounds about right: bufferbloat is well on its way to being treated se= riously: first derided, then ignored, then accepted, then discovered... Best, Rich=