Re: [Bloat] What does cablelabs certification actually do?

[jb <justin@dslr.net>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1766 bytes --]

So after writing, I discovered they were asked about the problem with the
Puma6 chipset and stated their job as they see it is mainly to test for
standards compliance etc, and they purposely steer clear of performance in
order to encourage competition and variety. Or some punt like that. (I'm
probably mangling the message bit but that was the gist of it).

I guess there are such a huge number of devices and firmware releases it is
an endless job to evaluate each for performance in depth (beyond top
speed). Perhaps they are like cars before Ralph Nader. Unsafe at any speed?
IoT devices would fall into that category for sure!

On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 5:39 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> wrote:

> On Fri, 9 Dec 2016, jb wrote:
>
> And then wondered why certification can't also include verification for
>> correctly sized buffers as well?
>>
>
> There is nothing stopping this, and it's being worked on (PIE goes into
> DOCSIS 3.1).
>
> http://www.cablelabs.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/DOCSIS-AQM_May2014.pdf
> https://www.nanog.org/sites/default/files/20160922_Klatsky_
> First_Steps_In_v1.pdf
>
> Cable Labs (as far as I understand) is an organisation funded by cable
> operators and vendors, and they create standards and tests used by the
> cable industry.
>
> I don't know what tests Cable Labs perform, but there is nothing stopping
> them from validating buffers+AQM in the modems as well, and I do hope they
> do this going forward.
>
> Why not reach out to Greg White who is mentioned in the cablelabs
> DOCSIS-AQM pdf above and ask? Or even better, invite him to this list if
> he's not already here. He's on the IETF AQM WG list, I have posts by him in
> my folder back to 2013.
>
> --
> Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2661 bytes --]