7) transmission ate a metric ton of cpu (30% on a i3) at these speeds.

> 

> 8) My (cable) link actually is 140mbit down, 11 up. I did not much

> care for asymmetric networks when the ratios were 6x1, so 13x1 is way

> up there....

> 

> Anyway, 20% packet loss of the "right" packets was survivable. I will

> subject myself to the same test on other fq or aqms. And, if I can

> force myself to, with no aqm or fq. For SCIENCE!

> 

> Attention, DMCA lawyers: Please send takedown notices to

> bufferbloat-research@/dev/null.org . One of the things truly

> astonishing about this is that in 12 hours in one night I downloaded

> more stuff than I could ever watch (mp4) or listen to (even in flac

> format) in several days of dedicated consumption. And it all just got

> rm -rf'd. It occurs to me there is a human upper bound to how much

> data one would ever want to consume, and we cracked that limit at

> 20mbit, with only 4k+ video driving demand any harder. When we started

> bufferbloat.net 20mbit downlinks were the best you could easily get.

Linux ISOs are a great way to saturate your download. I have enough downloaded that while seeding, I can sustain over 10Mb/s, but don't expect to saturate your upload since they're already heavily seeded, but less so since I stopped recently.