From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-oi0-x229.google.com (mail-oi0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::229]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 81BC821F2C5 for ; Fri, 22 May 2015 12:33:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: by oihd6 with SMTP id d6so21310055oih.2 for ; Fri, 22 May 2015 12:33:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=oX5u0pgASV4IE7C2IG0UdSpZXFrTAj5/aN0pw8nCxhU=; b=hW3Ti+DwL9qhraVEoVs3Req8lTKIzwtoD20MFG9339sBLJ85rpwA4i/MzkLuPss9T1 0Cho6PJ1+1JMxMRytooYqr7iWKKu89oKZ1WUMe2rvqO0N+r2JT134M4z9QrmG2Qhx4Vh JAwJl7eLhRbGT6+l5EvGYuVc9eX5zzMW1dqspqoAxc769qB2ORfaa1aEaLmMrTB8mDbP LBoYttYZQ8daIdPBjijBZ2Cfun4UegE6NmYvlimaaODr1t0ZkFysg1D3W1ZfGuZ1w7vx rjQ7z/Zkugija3Ye7EsXDwMfxUuIk1XENeHxVa0z6i+s65ZkdfluGvnm4BlIXQR5LDhw GmQQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.178.33 with SMTP id cv1mr6554994oec.11.1432323216309; Fri, 22 May 2015 12:33:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.202.105.146 with HTTP; Fri, 22 May 2015 12:33:36 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <58264BE0-CDBE-4739-B03D-4BAA20B13997@gmail.com> <8FFDE0DF-0F5A-4A3F-A47B-F8D59EEC7971@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 12:33:36 -0700 Message-ID: From: Dave Taht To: jb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: bloat Subject: Re: [Bloat] dslreports mockup 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: Fri, 22 May 2015 19:34:29 -0000 X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 19:34:29 -0000 On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 12:00 AM, jb wrote: > Well the dual Y-Axis thing didn't work. > It would require removal of the color bands and looked confusing. k. > So I've done a drill-down thing instead. You get just three bars, then ca= n > drill into each by clicking, to see an expansion against its own Y-Axis. > Hard to explain, easier to see: > > http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/525965 1) It shows "series 2" for the drill downs rather than upload/download/idle= . 2) I am not big on averages, period. showing min/median/max on the bar char= t is more satisfying to me, (see relevant netperf-wrapper plottype), but I kn= ow that too is confusing to users. Saying "average bloat" is sort of like saying this drug only kills 2% of people on average - it might be accurate statistically (except for missing a long term trendline and not coping with different RTTs well), but it does tend to matter to those it kills. I know tons of people like plain old bar charts, but... 3) I like how this drilldown and the previous detailed graphs shows the queues building over the course of the test. This lends intuition to the problem (and shows the trendline in particular) Perhaps something that would be interesting would be for the drill down to instead swap between graphs over an interval (every few seconds), then stop on the worst one after 20 seconds.... going back to the first screen of the test actually running: 4) The radar ping plot is boring after the test starts, and on a small laptop the bufferbloat "tach" is invisible. I would remove the radar ping plot after the test starts and stick the bloat tach there instead. Aint I demanding? 5) (this is still marvellous work and deepest gratitude, and so on, and thanks for playing with us) 6) we are so losing on inbound at the moment. http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/529300 7) I hope to add some tests to the finally renamed flent (formerly netperf-wrapper) that will more closely duplicate your tests. In particular, I want to add support for many different remote servers to all the basic tests. You have clearly pointed out that we need to tackle that, and see items 5, and 6... Are you settled on 16/6 for the basic "cable" test, in particular? > On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Jonathan Morton > wrote: >> >> >> > On 22 May, 2015, at 03:17, jb wrote: >> > >> > Or I can just have two Y-Axis with auto-scaling on both. >> >> You could also try a square-root scale (as opposed to linear or >> logarithmic). This should help with comparing data with different order= s of >> magnitude, without flattening things as aggressively as a log scale. >> >> But perhaps we should see what it looks like before committing to it. >> >> - Jonathan Morton >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Bloat mailing list > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat > --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht Open Networking needs **Open Source Hardware** https://plus.google.com/u/0/+EricRaymond/posts/JqxCe2pFr67