From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ob0-x231.google.com (mail-ob0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::231]) (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 AA78821F32F for ; Thu, 25 Sep 2014 06:25:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ob0-f177.google.com with SMTP id va2so6396241obc.8 for ; Thu, 25 Sep 2014 06:25:44 -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=WwCfAbGFUnmUa9P5uKjklW9Ih8U4uoiRn8kVw6cVxBY=; b=shooUTxGWl0jTcRdxvBHSSd+uJRNpYbeKtIB3dvo9KHYyoPNJubEdMqmhWv+WsRrVl XCB1Kn8bn/8MofYoZTbeiWtndsjaplrrwj93AG4c1k2NjLafBzJHaERApI2/JpqRqrbI 0drtvSZR/vgnYYnSD59c2Q7XseZSuS/V3v0XOjJEcPHH2HSmrIPSCankt6TKSXQ9XYYQ YtG7pxkX7x30L5mwzXCGx4Mx67DLRSUz+SfVupVvtnp8UOhYnfFhBrjmwLNbeNAir9Ee IAODGsTYuSHjOwSlBfmpDzPgzVeybMCTd8HueiS0y2y5YyhHPzE/prbaqsNbBXWAVVWj uR3g== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.15.130 with SMTP id x2mr13793441oec.45.1411651544054; Thu, 25 Sep 2014 06:25:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.202.227.76 with HTTP; Thu, 25 Sep 2014 06:25:43 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2014 06:25:43 -0700 Message-ID: From: Dave Taht To: Mikael Abrahamsson Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: bloat Subject: Re: [Bloat] I feel an urge to update this 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, 25 Sep 2014 13:26:13 -0000 On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 6:00 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrot= e: > On Thu, 25 Sep 2014, David Lang wrote: > >> What is the problem with making this assumption? Why should we try to >> change every device on the Internet to provide this information instead = of >> just using this as the default? > > Read the email that started this thread. One saving grace of the IW10 deployment so far is that it is (mostly) limited to Linux, and that methods, such as pacing/initial spreading/fq, to cope with it better, are developing concurrently. It's not all bad - on GigE ethernet networks, it's ok, IW10 may well be useful in wifi packet aggregation, etc, but it does do potentially a great deal of damage to networks running at very low rates. My concern has largely been the collateral damage it causes network uploads from the edge, where vastly lower rates are common. It could be mitigated further in a desktop deployment by (for example) sticking with IW4 for everything going out a default gateway, and steps taken to make sure applications like bittorrent/transmission used a lower default. I have no idea what the IW is for android, but that should perhaps be lower also. I think ledbat shouldn't have an IW at all.... I would not mind if IW information was carried as a payload in dhcp/hnetd/e= tc... I have no problem with people suggesting changes here that require "changing the entire internet". We seem to have done that a couple times, already. :) It would be nice if we could calculate the damage it causes along whatever portion of the internet is running at below 10Mbit.... A simple question - how many T1 lines are left in the world? > -- > Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht https://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/make-wifi-fast