From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-la0-x230.google.com (mail-la0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::230]) (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 6216621F14B for ; Mon, 30 Mar 2015 09:05:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: by lajy8 with SMTP id y8so6866755laj.0 for ; Mon, 30 Mar 2015 09:05:19 -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; bh=Z0LjCV6BFGTVy6nMi87+ZqIET/peoUJ9pTE8ZR2JRLE=; b=wium/aIY3BV050y7nixL4mqS9FyuBKRI2r/BtUg1wj1Hp0d+07VUHAjOLpAxf5HDSh /p9CGJsHC55542ybyhspM2sBWYL9Nbo1jL+KQ2wiLp3vpXbc4JtM71hul9uBOlJBFpww Dc4F/0i8K/zEB1VxbCNer73tfwbDAGo2PVpx625KMunW8T2QQEl/XNnn+nSoLjgvoezr RxNrKSvYMBD+8aNgcgk7dPAkyYDHp33NclAymraQ64b1DMjmx5kH1DC7V+eeeC966LxZ nhCBePwE7NrGlb9uL3QGOI4VCMWaVG6J6GTM5y2Y+pcS8au5s15+mA6GX5ngI8D9Fn23 RIGQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.207.11 with SMTP id ls11mr26528015lac.97.1427731519787; Mon, 30 Mar 2015 09:05:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.200.73 with HTTP; Mon, 30 Mar 2015 09:05:19 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20150316203532.05BD21E2@taggart.lackof.org> <123130.1426635142@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> <15A0911A-E3B7-440A-A26B-C5E1489EA98B@viagenie.ca> <1426773234.362612992@apps.rackspace.com> <1426796961.194223197@apps.rackspace.com> <5FD20B4A-A7E8-48C0-89F9-E2EB86DED8A6@gmail.com> <755FC1BE-141C-42FD-B3E3-564488982665@gmail.com> <95B0F8DA-7650-4064-BEE6-F0CDF936D33A@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2015 18:05:19 +0200 Message-ID: From: Pedro Tumusok To: Dave Taht Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113467ca125b54051283a6c1 Cc: Jonathan Morton , "dpreed@reed.com" , bloat Subject: Re: [Bloat] Latency Measurements in Speed Test suites (was: DOCSIS 3+ recommendation?) 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: Mon, 30 Mar 2015 16:05:50 -0000 --001a113467ca125b54051283a6c1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 4:55 PM, Dave Taht wrote: > I think the most effective thing would be to add bufferbloat testing > infrastructure to the web browsers themselves. There are already > plenty of tools for measuring web performance (whyslow for firefox, > the successor to chrome web page benchmarker) more or less built in... > measuring actual network performance under load is not much of a > reach. > > Dave, That is feature creep, we originally discussed having continuous ping measurement under load. New ideas not so welcome ;) -- Best regards / Mvh Jan Pedro Tumusok --001a113467ca125b54051283a6c1 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 4:55 PM, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com&= gt; wrote:
I think the most effect= ive thing would be to add bufferbloat testing
infrastructure to the web browsers themselves. There are already
plenty of tools for measuring web performance (whyslow for firefox,
the successor to chrome web page benchmarker) more or less built in...
measuring actual network performance under load is not much of a
reach.


Dave,

That is= feature creep, we originally discussed having continuous ping measurement = under load.
New ideas not so welcome ;)

= --=C2=A0
Best regards / MvhJan Pedro Tumusok

--001a113467ca125b54051283a6c1--