From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ig0-x22f.google.com (mail-ig0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::22f]) (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 6391B21F613 for ; Sat, 6 Jun 2015 03:22:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by igbsb11 with SMTP id sb11so30704131igb.0 for ; Sat, 06 Jun 2015 03:22:35 -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=vI0oNPuMys7sOx6NEHL2RJ0USYsRk8Za6GSeCNBzYvA=; b=tOGkr0Z9XSVjsIA1VVQ6IyM0nhqGSzpSA0p6qM4RZ0VbN69un/srOnU6AF1579P2Ea LhGYgme6Di762bCptrNKYNdDughTVzvc810naI6+K/k6NwTjBqbu70NlRnJ1gHe3eFRt +KKMGwO/jLn4E+lrw0ENSaIc1PpYclzzfPWkuX0LkdTDhoa374ZQcPuG439I38TeAna5 TgXmquG6vlNtQWuVFNrLp0kMYrGHugreEmVuSltGVpyyQZVif+dUHMBuoMlSBS4hPpuO Af7QlhU0rJIw0o4Ern5E2bEjUVbVaRRq8Y3qz7+2cwwsOKQabycMdydOeLUmdBC6g/a2 5M2w== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.132.33 with SMTP id or1mr2906187igb.31.1433586155159; Sat, 06 Jun 2015 03:22:35 -0700 (PDT) Sender: justinbeech@gmail.com Received: by 10.50.107.42 with HTTP; Sat, 6 Jun 2015 03:22:34 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5572C5AE.7040300@darbyshire-bryant.me.uk> References: <7D4DDC3F-9233-4E07-B59B-AA1368CA9D4E@gmail.com> <5571B334.7050607@darbyshire-bryant.me.uk> <5571DA4E.5060809@darbyshire-bryant.me.uk> <5571DC01.70301@k.gg> <5571E1A7.9050403@k.gg> <5571E322.1010403@darbyshire-bryant.me.uk> <5571E36E.2050607@k.gg> <5572B325.70307@darbyshire-bryant.me.uk> <5572C5AE.7040300@darbyshire-bryant.me.uk> Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2015 20:22:34 +1000 X-Google-Sender-Auth: dYLQcHBXzTD9tHxx-EYz3VAYJCA Message-ID: From: jb To: Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b1636e18889950517d6c9fb Cc: bloat Subject: Re: [Bloat] Bloat goes away, but with ~25% speed loss? 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: Sat, 06 Jun 2015 10:23:04 -0000 --047d7b1636e18889950517d6c9fb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 All input is good. Because the general web using population seems to have barely enough focus to last the length a tweet compared to even five years ago. I do tend to react and type first, then later it does have the desired impact so sorry if it came over as a bit defensive. I fully agree with your caution in going for big ranking lists! On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 8:04 PM, Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant < kevin@darbyshire-bryant.me.uk> wrote: > On 06/06/2015 10:30, jb wrote: > > My 2c - I wasn't planning on creating pages listing ISPs in order of > decreasing buffer bloat score. > > Good :-) > > > And for speeds of course in the USA and most markets there are ranges of > products each with their own speed and price attached, so ranking ISPs by > any simple averaging of speeds is pointless as well. > > Absolutely. I despair in this country because there's a regular 'ISP A is > faster than ISP B' graph/battle...and it really makes no sense. > > > However I think there is value in map-based speed results especially > ones that pin down average speeds and technologies to streets and towns, > and if there is any value at all in grading a single test for bufferbloat > (or latency to major cities, or jitter, or packet loss ..) then there is > also value in combining those statistics. > > If you're in a geographical/single supplier situation then yes. In the UK > it simply doesn't work like that, any area, 'any' supplier. > > > And even just pure speeds, one can statistically work out products and > create interesting comparisons, both spot, and changes over time. Even if, > at least in the US, there is no way to switch because your local cable > company is your local cable company. > > Our speeds are fundamentally controlled by how close to the > cabinet/exchange you are, not really ISP controlled. There are 2 bandings > on VDSL though, 80/20, 40/10. ADSL is a bit more 'best effort' > Incidentally VDSL is advertised as a 'fibre' service in this country! You > can get real fibre, but really it's Fibre(rare to the home), Cable(Virgin > Media), VDSL(effectively BT), ADSL(BT&others) > > > There is also value in showing just how far a few ISPs are ahead of > everyone. > > For example, in the USA, any speed ranking would put google fiber far > out in front, and Verizon FIOS far in front for upload speed. Why hide that > information? There may be a few ISPs that really get on top of buffer bloat > as well, and highlighting those, if they exist, makes sense to me. This can > be done without doing a top 100 chart full of nonsense. > > :-) No top 100 nonsense yay :-) > > I *am* very interested to see up/down bufferbloat split out by > ISP/delivery technology though. And I am very positive about the > dslreports bloat test, it's really very good and it's great to see people > making the issue of bufferbloat more measurable and more mainstream. > Apologies if I've sounded less than appreciative. > > Kevin > --047d7b1636e18889950517d6c9fb Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
All input is good. Because the general web using populatio= n seems to have barely enough focus to last the length a tweet compared to = even five years ago.

I do tend to react and type first, t= hen later it does have the desired impact so sorry if it came over as a bit= defensive. I fully agree with your caution in going for big ranking lists!=

On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 8:04 PM, Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant <kevin@darbyshire-bryant.me.uk> wrote:
=20 =20 =20
On 06/06/2015 10:30, jb wrote:
=20
My 2c - I wasn't planning on creating pages list= ing ISPs in order of decreasing buffer bloat score.
 Good :-)

And for speeds of course in the USA and most markets there are ranges of products each with their own speed and price attached, so ranking ISPs by any simple averaging of speeds is pointless as well.
 Absolutely.=C2=A0 I despair in this country because there's a regul= ar 'ISP A is faster than ISP B' graph/battle...and it really makes= no sense.

However I think there is value in map-based speed results especially ones that pin down average speeds and technologies to streets and towns, and if there is any value at all in grading a single test for bufferbloat (or latency to major cities, or jitter, or packet loss ..) then there is also value in combining those statistics.
 If you're in a geographical/single supplier situation then yes.=C2= =A0 In the UK it simply doesn't work like that, any area, 'any' su= pplier.

And even just pure speeds, one can statistically work out products and create interesting comparisons, both spot, and changes over time. Even if, at least in the US, there is no way to switch because your local cable company is your local cable company.
 Our speeds are fundamentally controlled by how close to the cabinet/exchange you are, not really ISP controlled.=C2=A0 There are 2 bandings on VDSL though, 80/20, 40/10.=C2=A0 ADSL is a bit more 'be= st effort'=C2=A0=C2=A0 Incidentally VDSL is advertised as a 'fibre= ' service in this country!=C2=A0 You can get real fibre, but really it's Fibre(r= are to the home), Cable(Virgin Media), VDSL(effectively BT), ADSL(BT&others)

There is also value in showing just how far a few ISPs are ahead of everyone.=C2=A0

For example, in the USA, any speed ranking would put google fiber far out in front, and Verizon FIOS far in front for upload speed. Why hide that information? There may be a few ISPs that really get on top of buffer bloat as well, and highlighting those, if they exist, makes sense to me. This can be done without doing a top 100 chart full of nonsense.
 :-)=C2=A0 No top 100 nonsense yay :-)

I *am* very interested to see up/down bufferbloat split out by ISP/delivery technology though.=C2=A0 And I am very positive about the dslreports bloat test, it's really very good and it's great to = see people making the issue of bufferbloat more measurable and more mainstream.=C2=A0 Apologies if I've sounded less than appreciative.=

Kevin

--047d7b1636e18889950517d6c9fb--