From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-13-ewr.dyndns.com (mxout-197-ewr.mailhop.org [216.146.33.197]) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E91772E041C for ; Tue, 1 Mar 2011 05:59:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from scan-12-ewr.mailhop.org (scan-12-ewr.local [10.0.141.230]) by mail-13-ewr.dyndns.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3484A4DC56 for ; Tue, 1 Mar 2011 13:58:23 +0000 (UTC) X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) X-Mail-Handler: MailHop by DynDNS X-Originating-IP: 209.85.210.171 Received: from mail-iy0-f171.google.com (mail-iy0-f171.google.com [209.85.210.171]) by mail-13-ewr.dyndns.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 343C0A4DB77 for ; Tue, 1 Mar 2011 13:58:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: by iyf40 with SMTP id 40so5095525iyf.16 for ; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 05:58:22 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=Ob7pkDOjKDq2gYgd2O9Gz2LsKQUZ/bw3O9/dRUcdlEM=; b=W80fHwbcUgkju8wPpe4rXdAjDIb7PMrgAbOhZ7ZOZFsohMPoo9HOIpLqkEYYWdOE+B Z8Ww1TCzC3Ctu1GXY9ESps0OGBHGMKHhT07WXZChk39i22vl1o1Lq5PV6dJX5GmMcIk8 tMlRmMqAlZ/ryN19kc1DeKYeE5kY6HATYRGoQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; b=uKDrvenVTVIAaklgNqBKL07EkzG7/DuHQWOYENcX3ERqotJEET9azDnsKs0hGHr3Ls AsXSBdK5KqKB41fk/i361glAWjrIEPpjYGV9sEe23fRKgYtOyQMRUbNSHVpr84DpsJHF aKOG7T24tvgFrprQQ2aEIPIiSEG2SPZ532CZw= Received: by 10.43.57.20 with SMTP id we20mr5645400icb.63.1298987901100; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 05:58:21 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: steven.bauer@gmail.com Received: by 10.231.206.203 with HTTP; Tue, 1 Mar 2011 05:57:51 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <1298930176.15371.51.camel@amd.pacdat.net> References: <1298930176.15371.51.camel@amd.pacdat.net> From: Steve Bauer Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 08:57:51 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: AJZlMBk2rE7BIrIvyBG9Qz3rF6Y Message-ID: To: richard Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net Subject: Re: [Bloat] Usage Based Billing - It's All About Perceived Congestion 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: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 13:59:04 -0000 On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 4:56 PM, richard wrote: > The result is: > http://digital-rag.com/article.php/All-About-Perceived-Congestion-UBB > It's aimed at the public and non-technical so allow me a few missing > things in the explanations :) Hi Richard, You recommended to your readers: "You want to bug your ISP to turn off any/all "helper" buffering in your modem that purports to "increase upload speed for short periods" since this is buffering and part of the problem." I am assuming you intended that to apply to Powerboost. Based upon my understanding of various implementations of Powerboost, turning it off would *not* help with latency under load simply because the buffer sizes are fixed in today's cable modems. So these issues are orthogonal. There are certainly problems, but turning off Powerboost isn't part of the fix. Indeed, turning Powerboost off could make the problem worse. A buffer that would otherwise have drained if Powerboost was in effect, would be more likely to have a queue of packets sitting in it adding additional latency to later arrivals. Again, my key assumption is that disabling Powerboost simply doesn't change the buffer size. As always, happy to be proved wrong. :-) Thanks, Steve Bauer MIT