From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ob0-x22f.google.com (mail-ob0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::22f]) (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 EF04121F263 for ; Wed, 29 Apr 2015 21:43:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by oblw8 with SMTP id w8so36228547obl.0 for ; Wed, 29 Apr 2015 21:43:58 -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=tDTa5gcHGX4RYe25ZJgZSW9ldU5jvBr3eAKx92NkKO4=; b=Pj/LfKxbFcbiHhQFi5xTCr5epFRefBZ7jLtGlPvLagwdvZiVIzkzORSJXpb8vi1oNH N6xhvsxdWczbWOIUEtTv6HmoSLILoZunDAQ+HMcqFJTHh7vfpSO/CxxbRIg+dkYo6fGU bnsNuv02FUphmi3WrWDve6i0vy5rztAioqgp48H8YBtttU6AmHJ4nQzo5pqk+g6cXYv3 64+rRnyocF//glPI++Gq1Wdntg+ZBhogmriCXs1YlDKEpJkTQ8qfEwLPUZGX5cgnJdtA AiWVa9dvAPsZA0Z1eQEdr96mDhhGsYYsnM0lIH/S41+VyfONn8nTtEqxeiuGoWg0k80b iVZQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.202.4.76 with SMTP id 73mr1852283oie.11.1430369038496; Wed, 29 Apr 2015 21:43:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.202.71.139 with HTTP; Wed, 29 Apr 2015 21:43:58 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <87618e6gkm.wl-jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr> Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2015 21:43:58 -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] extremely good dslreports result for bufferbloat on free.fr 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: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 04:44:28 -0000 A: (fq_codel no ecn) (http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/393466 A+ (fq_codel + ecn was enabled) http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/393300 A: (fq_codel) http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/393241 A: (fq_codel) http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/391178 D: (fq_codel on the link but over wifi) http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/391178 Lemme go check native comcast and pie.... On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 9:33 PM, jb wrote: > yes it did get no rating, I don't generate ratings unless everything look= s > "right", > meaning a decent number of down idle and up pings. > > http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/377563 > > There are only 6 latency samples during download, even though the downloa= d > phase started at the 12 second mark and continued until the 23 second mar= k, > (meaning 11 seconds). > > The latency pings that happened during the download got held up to the > extent > that they came in and were counted as "idle" ones. I'll have to ponder on > this, > I think my pings need to be labelled by origin (what we were doing when t= hey > were sent) not classified as they return. > > if it did get a rating it would be an "D" or "F".. > > > On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Dave Taht wrote: >> >> Heh. Anything above a 250ms gets a F from me. But I strongly approve >> of simplification to a set of grades. >> >> http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/378980 F, for sure. >> >> Secondly, we tend to regard bufferbloat as one word not two. >> >> This result got no rating. http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/377563 >> >> On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 9:07 PM, jb wrote: >> > I've added the discussed "bloat rating". >> > >> > It takes the idle period before download uses the lowest latency as a >> > baseline. >> > then it takes the median download and median of upload+trailing idle >> > time, >> > and >> > subtracts to get the latency increase, then converts to a grade. >> > >> > Based on a very few results I've looked at the Grade seems reasonable. >> > I've >> > added >> > a link below the grade for the WTF is this moment a lot of people will >> > have, >> > which >> > takes them to a short FAQ entry, and then a link to bufferbloat.net .. >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 4:32 AM, Dave Taht wrote= : >> >> >> >> On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek >> >> wrote: >> >> > Free.fr (Proxad) is certainly much better than other ISPs -- they'v= e >> >> > been >> >> > the first to give sort-of-native (6rd) IPv6 to the masses. However= , >> >> > there's one thing that annoys me -- they have two distinct CPEs, th= e >> >> > classic FreeBox (which I have) and the FreeBox Revolution (which is >> >> > slightly less cheap, and takes more physical space -- a big deal if >> >> > you >> >> > live in Paris). The classic FreeBox needs some love from the >> >> > firmware >> >> > developers, and I'd be curious to know whether your results apply >> >> > equally >> >> > to both boxen. >> >> >> >> All ya gotta do is run the new dslreports and/or rrul test(s) on your >> >> own older box, and post. ;) >> >> >> >> My understanding was that the old freebox was too weak to run anythin= g >> >> but SFQ, but it did run that on the outbound. >> >> >> >> > >> >> > (The thing that most pisses me off with the classic FreeBox is that >> >> > it >> >> > doesn't allow IPv6 subnetting -- unless you order the FreeBox >> >> > Revolution, >> >> > you're condemned to the purgatory of ND-proxying. Grr.) >> >> >> >> As tiny as the mods now are to support more extensive ipv6 in openwrt= , >> >> that certainly was not the case in 2012. >> >> >> >> > >> >> > -- Juliusz >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Dave T=C3=A4ht >> >> Open Networking needs **Open Source Hardware** >> >> >> >> https://plus.google.com/u/0/+EricRaymond/posts/JqxCe2pFr67 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Bloat mailing list >> >> Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net >> >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat >> > >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Dave T=C3=A4ht >> Open Networking needs **Open Source Hardware** >> >> https://plus.google.com/u/0/+EricRaymond/posts/JqxCe2pFr67 > > --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht Open Networking needs **Open Source Hardware** https://plus.google.com/u/0/+EricRaymond/posts/JqxCe2pFr67