From: "Replikon Research, D-U-N-S/FCN 77-387-4974" <Admin@replikon.net>
To: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: [Bloat] Re: Vol 185, Issue 5
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2026 04:54:08 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAOnAEVaShddgVDzjhaEC=m5VPJ_j8P0Rr219TX-1+6mitcW=nQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <178979811506.1938.15903254559639098502@gauss>
There are two realms of analysis where things can blow up
One is synergy and synergetics meaning the interactions between presumably
interchangeable parts relevant to the interactions between presumably
interchangeable routers and node points
The other is combinatorics and that's my thing I love combinatorics!!!! The
only thing that matters is what you choose to count and how much each part
of what you count matters to you to put it concisely.
So while I have very little to contribute I am encouraged to hear that the
bottleneck is in the latency but the causes of the latency are
multi-dimensional there are at least we know where the problem is not where
that would mean we knew the causes no that's not right let me know is what
the problem is yes the problem is latency
What comes to mind is it for certain latencies there may be an echo like
the feedback of a guitar when the amplifiers turned up too high
Does that have any intuitional relationship to these very high level
Network analyzes that you all do everyday
This question of residence no not residents got darn it in the microphone
resonance like my voice yes
I think resonance and spectral radius are two characteristics of behind
level network analysis which apply here to this question of latency because
when spectral radius is one resonance is nearly inevitable
Is the internet we have built evolving to an internet in which some
parameterizable characteristic has a special radius of 1?
I sure as hell hope not
next parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-19 8:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <178979811506.1938.15903254559639098502@gauss>
2026-09-19 8:54 ` Replikon Research, D-U-N-S/FCN 77-387-4974 [this message]
2026-09-19 9:16 ` [Bloat] Re: Vol 185, Issue 5 David Lang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://lists.bufferbloat.net/postorius/lists/bloat.lists.bufferbloat.net/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAOnAEVaShddgVDzjhaEC=m5VPJ_j8P0Rr219TX-1+6mitcW=nQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=admin@replikon.net \
--cc=D.Goncz-FAX-571-395-3575@replikon.net \
--cc=bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox