Re: [Bloat] Fixing bufferbloat in 2017

[Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>]

On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 7:14 AM, Pedro Tumusok <pedro.tumusok@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 1:48 PM, David Collier-Brown <davec-b@rogers.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> A short RFC with a clear summary would change the ground on which we
>> stand.
>> Include me in if you're planning one.

For the record, the rfc output of the aqm working group is here:

https://tools.ietf.org/wg/aqm/

And I'd made an attempt at developing a short RFC

http://snapon.lab.bufferbloat.net/~d/draft-taht-home-gateway-best-practices-00.html

but encountered so much flack from the aqm-ers on the list, that I
gave up, and decided to concentrate on getting the code out there on
multiple platforms, to finding the problems in the algorithms in the
real world, and creating de-facto standards.


>>
>> --dave
>>
>
> There are some RFCs that vendors uses for throughput testing, RFC2544 I have
> seen on a few Firewall vendors datasheets atleast, not seen any reference
> RFC3511.
>
> Pedro
>
>
>>
>>
>> On 28/11/16 01:00 AM, Jan Ceuleers wrote:
>>>
>>> On 28/11/16 03:16, Jim Gettys wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Ookla may have made themselves long term irrelevant by their recent
>>>> behavior.  When your customers start funding development of a
>>>> replacement (as Comcast has), you know they aren't happy.
>>>>
>>>> So I don't sweat Ookla: helping out the Comcast test effort is probably
>>>> the best way to get bufferbloat in front of everyone, and best yet, the
>>>> code for the tests is out there.
>>>
>>> I do hope you're right Jim, but I still worry that Ookla is heavily
>>> entrenched in carriers' test labs. This position has, I believe, come
>>> about not because of Ookla's expertise in network testing but rather
>>> because of market pull (i.e. speedtest.net's huge popularity with
>>> end-users).
>>>
>>> As long as both of these positions remain (i.e. Ookla's mind share of
>>> end-users and their resulting market share in the labs of large
>>> purchasers of CPE) their lack of interest in bufferbloat is going to
>>> keep this topic off the agenda in a large part of the industry.
>>>
>>> Unless Ookla can be coerced somehow.
>>>
>>> I have previously suggested standardising network throughput testing
>>> methods and "grading" criteria. If there's an RFC on this subject
>>> carriers are going to be interested in conformance to it and will
>>> pressure their suppliers (of network testing gear, of CPE etc).
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Bloat mailing list
>>> Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> David Collier-Brown,         | Always do right. This will gratify
>> System Programmer and Author | some people and astonish the rest
>> davecb@spamcop.net           |                      -- Mark Twain
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bloat mailing list
>> Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
>
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards / Mvh
> Jan Pedro Tumusok
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bloat mailing list
> Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
>



-- 
Dave Täht
Let's go make home routers and wifi faster! With better software!
http://blog.cerowrt.org