From: "Richard Scheffenegger" <rscheff@gmx.at>
To: "Steve Davies" <steve@connection-telecom.com>,
<bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: [Bloat] Large buffers: deliberate optimisation for HTTP?
Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2011 23:35:27 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <A027517DC88547DB9E38C40C07A0BF8F@srichardlxp2> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=Q6Escgy39jbNn+3Ubm_L9LEXfq9ZNscR-QH09@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1615 bytes --]
No.
----- Original Message -----
From: Steve Davies
To: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
Sent: Friday, February 04, 2011 8:08 PM
Subject: [Bloat] Large buffers: deliberate optimisation for HTTP?
Hi,
I'm a new subscriber and hardly a hardcore network programmer. But I have been working with IP for years and even have Douglas Comer's books...
I was thinking about this issue of excess buffers. It occurred to me that the large buffers could be a deliberate strategy to optimise HTTP-style traffic. Having 1/2 MB or so of buffering towards the edge does mean that a typical web page and images etc can likely be "dumped" into those buffers "en-bloc".
Or maybe its not so deliberate but just that testing has become fixated on "throughput" and impact latency and jitter has been ignored. If you have a spanking new Gb NIC the first thing you do is try some scps and see how close to line-speed you can get. And lots of buffering helps that test in the absence of real packet loss in the actual link.
Perhaps the reality is that our traffic patterns are not typical of broadband link usage and that these large buffers that mess up our usage patterns (interactive traffic mixed with bulk data), actually benefit the majority usage pattern which is "chunky bursts".
Would you agree with my logic?
Steve
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Bloat mailing list
Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2771 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-02-04 22:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-02-04 19:08 Steve Davies
2011-02-04 22:35 ` Richard Scheffenegger [this message]
2011-02-05 0:35 ` Richard Scheffenegger
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://lists.bufferbloat.net/postorius/lists/bloat.lists.bufferbloat.net/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=A027517DC88547DB9E38C40C07A0BF8F@srichardlxp2 \
--to=rscheff@gmx.at \
--cc=bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net \
--cc=steve@connection-telecom.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox