From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ie0-x229.google.com (mail-ie0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c03::229]) (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 8E9AA21F1E8 for ; Tue, 26 May 2015 04:33:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by iesa3 with SMTP id a3so89481276ies.2 for ; Tue, 26 May 2015 04:33:31 -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:cc:content-type; bh=2dXeTduKOBE/agV6CELaL01VClwMnARHBt2xagshSWs=; b=SgP5MrX+3BftkqzTnyPFEcG9GWfxug7CXhIA0vAPmV7RRynVAMKTvidS9JMzimv2W0 jyrwB4GkaIlxjAP8g4KfaW/BmVeUMWIZnVfmJsYNKfZLtR3Z9kYWAoYU9wQA+p7xd8dw XsIKTRXMWNtCXWnG0SLtzW+PusNvzxbclaNPoNpKJ1yyMb1YjbWz7HrlSwzryNwumZiJ gkGMP451K/4m1MJGbw0pPJ+pevSjscOISjiXqN5jVCTcWnukHM4YaX11MRIcsW5RjQ2c 7K+wv8GG0kUwJSMA3xvaT9DCp6DZ2RHUzmQ1BBpjhMIYOpDs7Sfu10j5orvKApTvFYKk H/xQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.107.169.93 with SMTP id s90mr34134523ioe.83.1432640011609; Tue, 26 May 2015 04:33:31 -0700 (PDT) Sender: justinbeech@gmail.com Received: by 10.50.107.42 with HTTP; Tue, 26 May 2015 04:33:31 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5564394F.8080505@gmail.com> References: <555C825C.1010607@darbyshire-bryant.me.uk> <555F37AF.5080406@gmail.com> <5564394F.8080505@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 21:33:31 +1000 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 5UapM3rGf21wU3BsTM2oOjpI7UA Message-ID: From: jb Cc: bloat Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11421a1afbb0990516fa7e6d Subject: Re: [Bloat] Fwd: dslreports and inbound rate shaping 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: Tue, 26 May 2015 11:34:58 -0000 --001a11421a1afbb0990516fa7e6d Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 The test, and the issue of buffer bloat, got some coverage today in the Houston Chronicle: http://blog.chron.com/techblog/2015/05/new-speed-test-at-dslreports/ On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 7:13 PM, Alan Jenkins < alan.christopher.jenkins@gmail.com> wrote: > On 25/05/15 22:39, jb wrote: > > Regarding this part: > > > The baseline latency is because the bloat measurement uses a single > websocket ping server in America. Justin said in the forums it didn't seem > worth the effort to set up more of them. Seems worth an faq item though :(. > > Below huge speeds, upload testing is done with web socket now, > so there is a websocket address on every server now anyway. > > The baseline pinging to dslreports.com doesn't seem broken > but if necessary it can be changed to baseline pinging to the > nearest server, wherever that is. > > > Personally I might be skewed by using Firefox on Linux, I don't see the > awesome live bloat-meter, only the awesome bloat graphs. > > PS My firefox also doesn't show the new graph-based speedtest history. I > disabled the obvious culprits (noscript, ghostery, ublock) & there's > nothing on the JS console. Happy to help if needed. > > "Fixing" the bufferbloat ping graph would make it more directly comparable > to the pings on other speedtests. I think that makes the bufferbloat point > clearer. Again the issue is outside the US; in the UK I see a 100ms > "baseline". If it's simple to start using nearer servers, that would make > me very happy :). > > I agree it's not "broken". (I also use netperf-eu at 59ms). It's just > confusing to interpret, if you don't already know what bufferbloat is going > to look like. > > Particularly as the "expected" low ping value shown at the start. The > 100ms server isn't even shown on the ping radar part. > > If it's easier to just call out the destination country on the bufferbloat > ping, or fudge the figures convincingly (just graph the increases from a > minimum), that would answer my point too. > > Thanks > Alan > > > > The elephant in my personal room is the high latency baseline > >> > measurement. None of the ping response time test sites I've checked >> > give me anywhere near a baseline ping rtt of 100ms. Even dslreports >> > say "London UK is ~10ms, Google Europe is ~17ms, Dublin, Ireland, EU >> > is ~20ms, Frankfurt, DE, EU is ~27ms" So I clearly don't >> > understand some thing(s) about this test. >> > >> > Anyway, that's been an interesting 2 hours of playing! >> > >> > Kevin >> >> Good fun :). >> >> The baseline latency is because the bloat measurement uses a single >> websocket ping server in America. Justin said in the forums it didn't seem >> worth the effort to set up more of them. Seems worth an faq item though :(. >> > > --001a11421a1afbb0990516fa7e6d Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
The test, and the issue of buffer bloat, got some coverage= today
in the Houston Chronicle:

=



On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 7:13 PM, Alan Jenkins <alan.christopher.jenkins@gmail.com> wrote:
=20 =20 =20
On 25/05/15 22:39, jb wrote:
Regarding this part:

>=C2=A0The baseline latency is because the bloat measurement uses a single websocket ping server in America.=C2=A0 Justin said in the forums it didn't = seem worth the effort to set up more of them.=C2=A0 Seems worth an faq item though :(.

Below huge speeds, upload testing is done with web socket now,
so there is a websocket address on every server now anyway.

The baseline pinging to dslreports.com doesn't seem broken
but if necessary it can be changed to baseline pinging to the
nearest server, wherever that is.


 Personally I might be skewed by using Firefox on Linux, I don't see the awesome live bloat-meter, only the awesome bloat graphs.

PS My firefox also doesn't show the new graph-based speedtest history.=C2=A0 I disabled the obvious culprits (noscript, ghostery, ublock) & there's nothing on the JS console.=C2=A0 Happy to hel= p if needed.

"Fixing" the bufferbloat ping graph would make it more direct= ly comparable to the pings on other speedtests.=C2=A0 I think that makes t= he bufferbloat point clearer.=C2=A0 Again the issue is outside the US; in the UK I see a 100ms "baseline".=C2=A0 If it's simple to = start using nearer servers, that would make me very happy :).

I agree it's not "broken".=C2=A0 (I also use netperf-eu a= t 59ms).=C2=A0 It's just confusing to interpret, if you don't already know what bufferbloat is going to look like.

Particularly as the "expected" low ping value shown at the st= art.=C2=A0 The 100ms server isn't even shown on the ping radar part.

If it's easier to just call out the destination country on the bufferbloat ping, or fudge the figures convincingly (just graph the increases from a minimum), that would answer my point too.

Thanks
Alan

> > The elephant in my personal room is the high latency baseline
> measurement.=C2=A0 None of the ping response time test sites I've checked
> give me anywhere near a baseline ping rtt of 100ms.=C2=A0 Even dslreports
> say "London UK is ~10ms, Google Europe is ~17ms, Dublin, Ireland, EU
> is ~20ms, Frankfurt, DE, EU is ~27ms"=C2=A0 = =C2=A0So I clearly don't
> understand some thing(s) about this test.
>
> Anyway, that's been an interesting 2 hours of playing!
>
> Kevin

Good fun :).

The baseline latency is because the bloat measurement uses a single websocket ping server in America.=C2=A0 Justi= n said in the forums it didn't seem worth the effort to set up more of them.=C2=A0 Seems worth an faq item though := (.


--001a11421a1afbb0990516fa7e6d--