From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ie0-x233.google.com (mail-ie0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c03::233]) (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 8C9A621F263 for ; Wed, 29 Apr 2015 21:33:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by iecrt8 with SMTP id rt8so58648104iec.0 for ; Wed, 29 Apr 2015 21:33:57 -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:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=c6ybtIfi9ZZ6COe38ZctuHpCqgCtBvfPh87MmhPaAmA=; b=AF4KSa5xL3KMV8ydmF1weAh5U0DJmKY+oRo8xUDjEhr01eaEiSZB90fGx95V9y9qhg 2prxryBBJRaolD+/Oi6t257/DmEWzA4D67JB+pT+DueFysUgXPZ9Hf2UPkAQdBSBNFox b8cJ61C4of7LGlMAGW2SR4fy7JdNwOke1CSqH6XVYdgVccMa/FCscRcUe++I5JO8isuk U2av+oosrMRSvYpe+ELY4Delxt2X4dwxqtbMB4EAji1iUqNWyfrxpXtbksSK3UM2Hwmv Eox97gxjnJ4TJSrzOOPiYUMdwmr352SdXV0ZLvAvBID3KH5y7Fe22k27wUG3dcvvSv33 dV3Q== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.107.9.67 with SMTP id j64mr3117315ioi.39.1430368436891; Wed, 29 Apr 2015 21:33:56 -0700 (PDT) Sender: justinbeech@gmail.com Received: by 10.50.107.42 with HTTP; Wed, 29 Apr 2015 21:33:56 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <87618e6gkm.wl-jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr> Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 14:33:56 +1000 X-Google-Sender-Auth: IFrwi9MzqFZVmBehoLS2r23--Zc Message-ID: From: jb To: Dave Taht Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113df6d69436c40514e99a95 Cc: bloat Subject: Re: [Bloat] extremely good dslreports result for bufferbloat on free.fr 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, 30 Apr 2015 04:34:26 -0000 --001a113df6d69436c40514e99a95 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable yes it did get no rating, I don't generate ratings unless everything looks "right", meaning a decent number of down idle and up pings. http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/377563 There are only 6 latency samples during download, even though the download phase started at the 12 second mark and continued until the 23 second mark, (meaning 11 seconds). The latency pings that happened during the download got held up to the extent that they came in and were counted as "idle" ones. I'll have to ponder on this, I think my pings need to be labelled by origin (what we were doing when the= y were sent) not classified as they return. if it did get a rating it would be an "D" or "F".. On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Dave Taht wrote: > Heh. Anything above a 250ms gets a F from me. But I strongly approve > of simplification to a set of grades. > > http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/378980 F, for sure. > > Secondly, we tend to regard bufferbloat as one word not two. > > This result got no rating. http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/377563 > > On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 9:07 PM, jb wrote: > > I've added the discussed "bloat rating". > > > > It takes the idle period before download uses the lowest latency as a > > baseline. > > then it takes the median download and median of upload+trailing idle > time, > > and > > subtracts to get the latency increase, then converts to a grade. > > > > Based on a very few results I've looked at the Grade seems reasonable. > I've > > added > > a link below the grade for the WTF is this moment a lot of people will > have, > > which > > takes them to a short FAQ entry, and then a link to bufferbloat.net .. > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 4:32 AM, Dave Taht wrote: > >> > >> On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek > >> wrote: > >> > Free.fr (Proxad) is certainly much better than other ISPs -- they've > >> > been > >> > the first to give sort-of-native (6rd) IPv6 to the masses. However, > >> > there's one thing that annoys me -- they have two distinct CPEs, the > >> > classic FreeBox (which I have) and the FreeBox Revolution (which is > >> > slightly less cheap, and takes more physical space -- a big deal if > you > >> > live in Paris). The classic FreeBox needs some love from the firmwa= re > >> > developers, and I'd be curious to know whether your results apply > >> > equally > >> > to both boxen. > >> > >> All ya gotta do is run the new dslreports and/or rrul test(s) on your > >> own older box, and post. ;) > >> > >> My understanding was that the old freebox was too weak to run anything > >> but SFQ, but it did run that on the outbound. > >> > >> > > >> > (The thing that most pisses me off with the classic FreeBox is that = it > >> > doesn't allow IPv6 subnetting -- unless you order the FreeBox > >> > Revolution, > >> > you're condemned to the purgatory of ND-proxying. Grr.) > >> > >> As tiny as the mods now are to support more extensive ipv6 in openwrt, > >> that certainly was not the case in 2012. > >> > >> > > >> > -- Juliusz > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Dave T=C3=A4ht > >> Open Networking needs **Open Source Hardware** > >> > >> https://plus.google.com/u/0/+EricRaymond/posts/JqxCe2pFr67 > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Bloat mailing list > >> Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net > >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat > > > > > > > > -- > Dave T=C3=A4ht > Open Networking needs **Open Source Hardware** > > https://plus.google.com/u/0/+EricRaymond/posts/JqxCe2pFr67 > --001a113df6d69436c40514e99a95 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
yes it did get no rating, I don't generate ratings unl= ess everything looks "right",
meaning a decent number of down= idle and up pings.

http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/377563

There are only 6 latency samples during download, e= ven though the download
phase started at the 12 second mark and c= ontinued until the 23 second mark,
(meaning 11 seconds).

=
The latency pings that happened during the download got held up = to the extent
that they came in and were counted as "idle&qu= ot; ones. I'll have to ponder on this,
I think my pings need = to be labelled by origin (what we were doing when they
were sent)= not classified as they return.

if it did get a ra= ting it would be an "D" or "F"..


O= n Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:
Heh. Anything above a 250ms = gets a F from me. But I strongly approve
of simplification to a set of grades.

ht= tp://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/378980 F, for sure.

Secondly, we tend to regard bufferbloat as one word not two.

This result got no rating. http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/377563

On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 9:07 PM, jb <justinbeech@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've added the discussed "bloat rating".
>
> It takes the idle period before download uses the lowest latency as a<= br> > baseline.
> then it takes the median download and median of upload+trailing idle t= ime,
> and
> subtracts to get the latency increase, then converts to a grade.
>
> Based on a very few results I've looked at the Grade seems reasona= ble. I've
> added
> a link below the grade for the WTF is this moment a lot of people will= have,
> which
> takes them to a short FAQ entry, and then a link to bufferbloat.net ..
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 4:32 AM, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek
>> <jch@pps.univ-= paris-diderot.fr> wrote:
>> > Free.fr (Proxad) is certainly much better than other ISPs -- = they've
>> > been
>> > the first to give sort-of-native (6rd) IPv6 to the masses.=C2= =A0 However,
>> > there's one thing that annoys me -- they have two distinc= t CPEs, the
>> > classic FreeBox (which I have) and the FreeBox Revolution (wh= ich is
>> > slightly less cheap, and takes more physical space -- a big d= eal if you
>> > live in Paris).=C2=A0 The classic FreeBox needs some love fro= m the firmware
>> > developers, and I'd be curious to know whether your resul= ts apply
>> > equally
>> > to both boxen.
>>
>> All ya gotta do is run the new dslreports and/or rrul test(s) on y= our
>> own older box, and post. ;)
>>
>> My understanding was that the old freebox was too weak to run anyt= hing
>> but SFQ, but it did run that on the outbound.
>>
>> >
>> > (The thing that most pisses me off with the classic FreeBox i= s that it
>> > doesn't allow IPv6 subnetting -- unless you order the Fre= eBox
>> > Revolution,
>> > you're condemned to the purgatory of ND-proxying.=C2=A0 G= rr.)
>>
>> As tiny as the mods now are to support more extensive ipv6 in open= wrt,
>> that certainly was not the case in 2012.
>>
>> >
>> > -- Juliusz
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Dave T=C3=A4ht
>> Open Networking needs **Open Source Hardware**
>>
>> https://plus.google.com/u/0/+EricRaymond/posts/JqxCe= 2pFr67
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bloat mailing list
>> Bloat@lists.bufferb= loat.net
>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
>
>



--
Dave T=C3=A4ht
Open Networking needs **Open Source Hardware**

https://plus.google.com/u/0/+EricRaymond/posts/JqxCe2pFr67

--001a113df6d69436c40514e99a95--