From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ej1-x62b.google.com (mail-ej1-x62b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::62b]) (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 D06473B2A4 for ; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 15:02:07 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-ej1-x62b.google.com with SMTP id lr13so10881006ejb.8 for ; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 12:02:07 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=waveform.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=HzBYpsRfLRKCxUY9D2cec93iSveK6EVGyGjiJbLDF3A=; b=rsPyHqeH6tvK6kCGu2o3UwIayM4hl00leadVcFw/MP4ceyDOullW3atIZ6OE+XGzPE +uJrn5XHQpMTOeIR/rBfatOpGnju/+6FLpWdwQPQ0gBwwz6XbMrYnN3r9c/Qmq5yI0pH 5si/TcRN9Ypkyz5vxh9Ir3Zv03IouIdAx653FbCVb2wzsvDZFFlZPUxj3SSCHr4q+ey5 8x28IjZ9GY3tC7UdtLI0Q+QVLp7tUf8SE61vF+PwG8B9JkueDl30ASbVlupM/81+kJig ZCyFJpVygYWuvqd5V1zjQnqQSPQSLlTrH5/GxyfMuXgjvkZaOQl6/G7MC72eM95lVGmU ppsw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=HzBYpsRfLRKCxUY9D2cec93iSveK6EVGyGjiJbLDF3A=; b=oZiliD16/IucyPx5yUCdmZbSrpU3Y8EKTw5rIs+HInQ70gQ6sLXUXAXNtost1Mnda+ 910W34d4/Iv7HDYJ4a+w0mFwWUVmR2jsiuh04B5F4N7GffV/Mn6iNS5lLFvS2mqyK4sY yoAvoVE2XT6HfBtbCdO5uYD/vs5RjxKgIeyjpm8QegmET7CKfrS6DRmiOtwg+phY6Civ NMJ2IS/uClPSdvtbtuq/RBykpy3e0kM/8+N6NnC8Oq9lH+VlyxAKsvVIAjuLB+EnjGAB NX8evAY1Nlv65NIL5ERg2oZ66J4yQQxsBqcdY+Ah4/Nrj1S5OuvvEwpjWitcUmVxRPqT 21Eg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531gsCSnMjkzeNAcx9ZnlLA755UnnvF3hDI8E0zasfaM5sTp+EDI hjqnpjoy8LjCq1cjgKy29QSqIWeBtjWoDA/FRjqVlW3SuloqtrgqfFwRmOpBipQBtzjA26ndWYT a3SFBnrQDG9OpWLlgfMfpolYN8X7RgD5OaSWnwRFjqGAYtv+vRNFoJwYAr8CYxyH3zpahnOqO0z 13H2n5k1A= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyMcZ/6FlePcqn4eiL83W5uacATRpzYxMZoIglvYl73rz4m6guVED+IFG0549QkT+Kvbv0Tjw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:d0d2:: with SMTP id bq18mr4303054ejb.109.1614283326241; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 12:02:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ed1-f41.google.com (mail-ed1-f41.google.com. [209.85.208.41]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v9sm4355637edj.89.2021.02.25.12.02.06 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 25 Feb 2021 12:02:06 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ed1-f41.google.com with SMTP id l12so8444504edt.3 for ; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 12:02:06 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 2002:aa7:c3c7:: with SMTP id l7mr4799577edr.207.1614283325238; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 12:02:05 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <5CB9F40C-5FFB-4ABC-A184-A3C3A29D2413@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: <5CB9F40C-5FFB-4ABC-A184-A3C3A29D2413@gmx.de> From: Sina Khanifar Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2021 12:01:53 -0800 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: To: Sebastian Moeller Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Dave_T=C3=A4ht?= , sam@waveform.com, bloat Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Bloat] Updated Bufferbloat Test 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: Thu, 25 Feb 2021 20:02:08 -0000 > [SM] Maybe the solution would be to increase the frequency of the RTT mea= sures and increase the quantile somewhat, maybe 90 or 95? I think we scaled back the frequency of our RTT measurements to avoid CPU issues, but I think we can increase them a little and then use 95th percentile latency with a cutoff of 400ms or so as the check vs warning condition for videoconferencing, and VOIP. We could also maybe use the 95th percentile cutoff for gaming? I'm not sure what the limits/cutoff should be there, though. Would love some suggestions. On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 2:51 AM Sebastian Moeller wrote: > > Hi Sina, > > > > On Feb 25, 2021, at 06:56, Sina Khanifar wrote: > > > > Thanks for the feedback, Dave! > > > >> 0) "average" jitter is a meaningless number. In the case of a videocon= ferencing application, what matters most is max jitter, where the app will = choose to ride the top edge of that, rather than follow it. I'd prefer usin= g a 98% number, rather than 75% number, to weight where the typical delay i= n a videoconfernce might end up. > > > > Both DSLReports and Ookla's desktop app report jitter as an average > > rather than as a max number, so I'm a little hesitant to go against > > the norm - users might find it a bit surprising to see much larger > > jitter numbers reported. We're also not taking a whole ton of latency > > tests in each phase, so the 98% will often end up being the max > > number. > > [...] > > [SM] Maybe the solution would be to increase the frequency of the RTT mea= sures and increase the quantile somewhat, maybe 90 or 95? > > Best Regards > Sebastian