From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lf0-x233.google.com (mail-lf0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::233]) (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 95A313B2A2 for ; Wed, 12 Oct 2016 20:39:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-lf0-x233.google.com with SMTP id x79so107664880lff.0 for ; Wed, 12 Oct 2016 17:39:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=VotNDcFk9Z8b6gphXf5h9bnpaj+5Mg6i0EQl21fS7Qs=; b=JqYgLKZArKb/1hPW6SJB8GtvFm6RrHoEFQkLujjFRClfKuc7s8vpyh/pu4kx7pF5V5 ljXYrjDDMUITzKhy/OgDPg4gdPsPHH1owrKsr+kL9DTgcpyPTwB7NJ5BbGyIKOhZ2qF2 MYqFqGcP0+DJQuI7rqx26ws7iQmAr/elCaCJxdFN18U/TsMHDgMZGfz9jeJQX/owXVHt JA4HdgCbSZvyKqIllw0LAB7SEgLlky1pKI54v5zsyTmu0hg2QCkGzz8QoWiMQRpp2M6p ggCJE6k5V8W2F9woXOq0aTbmLNMULhGG44BKWGiKn1zZS/TYszI2EsnJ1dmOfhyyB0hW vKTQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=VotNDcFk9Z8b6gphXf5h9bnpaj+5Mg6i0EQl21fS7Qs=; b=FsvONj37O90HYXlocD+CslNR+ZHRgeHlS7Mq5cyRDCzYFIbVWF6UhLx756IKBLB4GJ gcjA6uCFX9rPNeDxabiD8tU338CKG9Px7iO1eF5egWB4l9BaWnCYtnVVzwkQL3zPXklO W6uGhrKhEggdOEXJOWywpYzJlabpIkQGBOh8Uxe2D98fE2Y+7zGbDviNfWiYQpB5qRtD WkZ05PAmsv7WVatTTd9f8UPJCrMmZDLlbt+nYPfz8QhSSInuxdTBUVj38VbwuabeErTP mTP6OfVTRfud9tULSa5dDepkSwjUZfuHLQQOJqDaN/oadq8uMFP5nnzQY0Hb3Q1MPqS0 KA7g== X-Gm-Message-State: AA6/9RmhSof3ktmg/YglwlPcrdkTDSLWahuUTcAiNaffzkTYEuikYS9imjhC5w1txXohkA2SLbTSG9F0bKDejw== X-Received: by 10.28.209.15 with SMTP id i15mr46032wmg.2.1476319175248; Wed, 12 Oct 2016 17:39:35 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: justinbeech@gmail.com Received: by 10.28.207.134 with HTTP; Wed, 12 Oct 2016 17:39:34 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: jb Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2016 11:39:34 +1100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 5FLHW4Uh_9A_WwvG8rsqWngCSNg Message-ID: To: Dave Taht Cc: bloat Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c1315ba04119b053eb4587d Subject: Re: [Bloat] grading bloat better 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, 13 Oct 2016 00:39:36 -0000 --94eb2c1315ba04119b053eb4587d Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable A while ago I changed from mean to median with the reasoning being that one spike to a crazy level was not representative of bloat but instead representative of a network stall or other anomaly. Graphs that were nearly all good samples with one outlier were being unfairly graded poorly. But this example has the opposite issue - the median of this set of samples is the first half where everything is ok. Hence the good score. Using a mean would be correct for this sample. What should happen is to throw away a couple (max) outliers first, then do a mean to avoid punishing the results that come in as good but include one errant measurement. thanks -Justin On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 11:16 PM, Dave Taht wrote: > This has major bloat happening at the end of the upload test. Which > worries me - here, at a gbit. > > http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/5284047 > > -- > Dave T=C3=A4ht > Let's go make home routers and wifi faster! With better software! > http://blog.cerowrt.org > _______________________________________________ > Bloat mailing list > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat > --94eb2c1315ba04119b053eb4587d Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
A while ago I changed from mean to median with the reasoni= ng being that one spike to a crazy level was not representative of bloat bu= t instead representative of a network stall or other anomaly. Graphs that w= ere nearly all good samples with one outlier were being unfairly graded poo= rly.

But this example has the opposite issue - the media= n of this set of samples is the first half where everything is ok. Hence th= e good score. Using a mean would be correct for this sample.
What= should happen is to throw away a couple (max) outliers first, then do a me= an to avoid punishing the results that come in as good but include one erra= nt measurement.

thanks
-Justin

On Wed, Oct 12,= 2016 at 11:16 PM, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:<= br>
This has major bloat happening at the end= of the upload test. Which
worries me - here, at a gbit.

http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/5284047

--
Dave T=C3=A4ht
Let's go make home routers and wifi faster! With better software!
ht= tp://blog.cerowrt.org
_______________________________________________
Bloat mailing list
Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net<= /a>
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat

--94eb2c1315ba04119b053eb4587d--