* [Bloat] bbr vs cubic network performance on high speed rail networks
@ 2018-12-18 3:42 Dave Taht
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Dave Taht @ 2018-12-18 3:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bloat, BBR Development
It's really weird to worry about throughput and latency at 300km/h vs
350km/hr, being as the fastest US train I've ever been on rarely
cracks 100kph.
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1812.04823.pdf - the handover bit (section 5.2
and later) was pretty interesting.
Round-trip-time (RTT). As shown in Fig. 6, BBR has more than twice
lower RTTs than CUBIC (e.g., 191.53 ms versus 431.35 ms at 300 km/h,
and 148.63 ms versus 345.02 ms at 350 km/h for median value) due to
their different CCA design rationales: BBR intends to suppress the RTT
to overcome the bufferbloat problem [24
--
Dave Täht
CTO, TekLibre, LLC
http://www.teklibre.com
Tel: 1-831-205-9740
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread
only message in thread, other threads:[~2018-12-18 3:42 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2018-12-18 3:42 [Bloat] bbr vs cubic network performance on high speed rail networks Dave Taht
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox