From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qc0-x235.google.com (mail-qc0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c01::235]) (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 2A12D21F284 for ; Sat, 2 May 2015 10:15:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by qcbgy10 with SMTP id gy10so2709445qcb.3 for ; Sat, 02 May 2015 10:15:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=CdFY05RlTsFi/TUhy5omzjr1a83xNUW6iSFL2nZ2HFQ=; b=SqXmRiNaTSGmR/FznQe1ZzeJNfiPW+FMKQm6Tf2gU2jcxOlIgAHkmYsMpquWTrm1G0 wMHPQaW6DOfEmBsLRcI/sn6sioz8KhV7IihLS2VV1cy2Jx6RgLCiF9jf4sfzfJMKajln lfj/7ty9YgBJSSUoWnjHLNv1kwyigimGI+7Pq/4+sS+iqS9KF5GUeME6qbeNvd62oAFE piOwAQM9/FYYs1bxN7LNM09cacrsVcGXJq8SHcM8T5hZzNKMyBtGkrxVC4Es1835Zlfz bmLptrVpYiL3SBpZn8/91l5p+CwCe7Lfl94nCDVj8zTafsT0E/NXNZwRFgLm6QgMy9Q+ FPHw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.140.40.137 with SMTP id x9mr17239710qgx.75.1430586952606; Sat, 02 May 2015 10:15:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.96.187.71 with HTTP; Sat, 2 May 2015 10:15:52 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <87618e6gkm.wl-jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr> <58258E43-953F-4A3B-ABC0-EA4193CC67C1@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 2 May 2015 10:15:52 -0700 Message-ID: From: Aaron Wood To: jb Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c123ee21691305151c7b9f 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: Sat, 02 May 2015 17:16:26 -0000 --001a11c123ee21691305151c7b9f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 8:10 PM, jb wrote: > Already users are like "how can i fix this!". > > I've just replied to one who has lower speeds on the surfboard SB6141 > which is a modem designed for crazy cable speeds. He has an "F" and his > downstream bloat is terrible, and upstream not much better. > I've got the same modem, and it's latency is "not horrible" in the face of good bandwidth (120 down/ 12 up), but this confirms my suspicion that it is a case of the higher rates result in less overall buffering time in the modem. -Aaron --001a11c123ee21691305151c7b9f Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 8:1= 0 PM, jb <justin@dslr.net> wrote:
Already users are like &q= uot;how can i fix this!".

I've just replied to = one who has lower speeds on the surfboard SB6141 which is a modem designed = for crazy cable speeds. He has an "F" and his downstream bloat is= terrible, and upstream not much better.

<= /div>
I've got the same modem, and it's latency is "not ho= rrible" in the face of good bandwidth (120 down/ 12 up), but this conf= irms my suspicion that it is a case of the higher rates result in less over= all buffering time in the modem.

-Aaron
--001a11c123ee21691305151c7b9f--