From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qk0-x234.google.com (mail-qk0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9DABA3B29F for ; Sat, 22 Oct 2016 21:45:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-qk0-x234.google.com with SMTP id f128so191085748qkb.1 for ; Sat, 22 Oct 2016 18:45:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=NrQTj8a/ah9Jht6p78XVc6VE5l3IT05dyn73WJxCcCY=; b=TbVuPag9ScxsrUhtRFd8woudDcglALgkL0JmvG32C5Y/ZiIMTa9ybT+JTjC7+PNcTR KP4yiSV4kZJ58ldMouVFwsCIvpUVYsz5GxG+W7o3ABhprH8Kc1D7+CiwWmx14pj8Svb6 54vHuElk2U3YfGAPapSTMp9PApv5cEy1qrRX9BIOsp58ZUWhKzS+ngo6tVdOoeeelk0y XoX1q9bVqJ/QYBUpsQ2mZBhtD65y52Yj2il25VOiD4bvQrUNKnCZRrdb0Zq+r/TlaEOI WVhaN6AeLhPnD1OBT2lUPNxF2Wg2b1PifkNSTLBFmT+v/d7qUV/vueyEpYZyef7B5hZM 1dfw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=NrQTj8a/ah9Jht6p78XVc6VE5l3IT05dyn73WJxCcCY=; b=G3F35z1qPrSDQimn7SZ4wCAxrWnlMn80HH/4t7NPfi6EVd91InWM4RjLH3qzWJzW9T D8Xh++AO2ihqvD5oT13/rmhJdfa6bK6jvCPWZEwCFNzh++GeEV+5nLgtQAefUTBrk/uq ghk4AIjnLJ5jiJrH8lmmZgtqwnyGQFnEHyVIL1fNu66ScgLlVr+/rIkafrqeB7Y4s51R tB3ZFvzAfkp5Yf087ZQ7gvxjCtjR+jIF9UR8/sUBWV7/FjTIs60IY8A1pnoMuNZXzQn3 FDMw0cf4za3uGAkHfrU9V/sNt58Yt2AMKsfZLnP8IAnunv81DqUvOyf0qguB7ggbQ5bH qxSA== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvdSM6u24chkba1CHXPEl7wMCuWZgCguuQGanXt/Uwa/lrUarcOi1MLOl+K9iLmdKGk46m92CTuwFM4jRQ== X-Received: by 10.55.102.17 with SMTP id a17mr8493001qkc.17.1477187141158; Sat, 22 Oct 2016 18:45:41 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.146.164 with HTTP; Sat, 22 Oct 2016 18:45:40 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Dave Taht Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2016 18:45:40 -0700 Message-ID: To: jb Cc: bloat Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Bloat] 22 seconds til bloat on gfiber? X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2016 01:45:41 -0000 On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 6:33 PM, jb wrote: > This example takes about 6 seconds to get all the uploads running as > they are staged, and then each upload takes a while to get to full speed > because that is a function of the senders TCP stack. So the smoothed > total transfer rate lags as well, and the whole thing doesn't start to bl= oat > out until we get to max speed. > > There is an upload duration preference that can increase the total time > upload or download takes but people already have no patience and > close the tab when they start seeing decent upload numbers, > so increasing it just makes the quit rate higher still. For the quitters > we get no results at all, other than they quit before the end of the test= . I agree that waiting that long is hard on users, and that since it takes so long to get to that point, it will take a lot of work for a gfiber user to stress out the connection, on a benchmark... but in the real world, with a few users on the link, not so much. 400-1000ms latency when loaded counts as an "F" grade, in my opinion. Perhaps doing the grade calculation only when the link is observed near max bandwidth achieved (say, half)? There are of course, other possible reasons for such bloat, like the browser falling over, I wish I had a gfiber network and routing device to test against. Is there any way to browse http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/results/isp/r3910-google-fiber for like the last 20 results to see if this is a common behavior on gfiber for longer tests? > thanks > > On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 10:52 AM, Jonathan Morton > wrote: >> >> >> > On 23 Oct, 2016, at 00:56, Dave Taht wrote: >> > >> > http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/5408767 >> >> Looks like that=E2=80=99s how long it takes for the throughput to ramp u= p to link >> capacity. That in turn is a function of the sender=E2=80=99s TCP. >> >> - Jonathan Morton >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Bloat mailing list >> Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat > > > > _______________________________________________ > Bloat mailing list > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat > --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht Let's go make home routers and wifi faster! With better software! http://blog.cerowrt.org