From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ob0-x22a.google.com (mail-ob0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::22a]) (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 10C9521FD7F for ; Thu, 9 Jul 2015 08:08:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by obbgp5 with SMTP id gp5so61292343obb.0 for ; Thu, 09 Jul 2015 08:08:54 -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=Lesk/89urg9/d7PfVU3OPkTxsgnmC4IiAaeWV35k3bs=; b=ubg8bW3AFII2Avo/ZKykNdUP8DkUCGFCsBX+xKv5dfxjP1ut5pdaACn4wGA/IFEj6a yl18aJyKfL+tjgqu08KkMj2FWjO/sJP+0Ig4xlpRB14PyEnkY/5nbh2+T2O+t0/vi44W djwCY73jWN53RrsU+T5DWxvyuIX6D2dh00rWhWTU65BpTbHeaXU65jjwl+XmydAwx9j3 clDA2k0nZ3BjlnwNmqNF7f6csEuJgc9liRvx1KDH/iUkHwMLwccDgCYHgDKHCePeVIq2 bQ9l826Pkb8YDxPFRbgI5DTT3LKTO+EIAQA1zn0m6aPNFIreeTeSWz0FSWccuRmAnZqx w+PA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.202.49.212 with SMTP id x203mr14400931oix.81.1436454533857; Thu, 09 Jul 2015 08:08:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.202.107.9 with HTTP; Thu, 9 Jul 2015 08:08:53 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20150709100723.CB767406057@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net> References: <20150709100723.CB767406057@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net> Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2015 08:08:53 -0700 Message-ID: From: Dave Taht To: Hal Murray Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: bloat Subject: Re: [Bloat] Graph of bloat 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, 09 Jul 2015 15:09:23 -0000 >> Judging from that graphic... I don't think huff and puff was designed fo= r >> the bufferbloated era! so the question remains, in hal's tests, did ntp >> adjust the clock backwards? > > No. The system that collected that data was getting time from a good loc= al GPS clock. It helps to have a place to stand if you want to collect tim= e data. > > Here is a typical pattern from a system using the pool without any huff-n= -puff while I did a big download. > 8 Jul 22:02:17 ntpd[26705]: 0.0.0.0 061c 0c clock_step -0.259747 s > 8 Jul 23:06:24 ntpd[26705]: 0.0.0.0 061c 0c clock_step +0.274448 s OK, so, out there, on the billions of machines that dnsmasq runs on, some are crashing when this happens. I don't think I am satisified with the solutions. http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/pipermail/dnsmasq-discuss/2015q3/009701.html > > > -- > These are my opinions. I hate spam. > > > --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht worldwide bufferbloat report: http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/results/bufferbloat And: What will it take to vastly improve wifi for everyone? https://plus.google.com/u/0/explore/makewififast