From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lf0-x234.google.com (mail-lf0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 614DD3B337 for ; Wed, 6 Apr 2016 22:14:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-lf0-x234.google.com with SMTP id g184so46832573lfb.3 for ; Wed, 06 Apr 2016 19:14:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=r4Im2z5ZHZrfdbsK2appml7T3q+CwmKg0fpGFYMiaV8=; b=Tkzw71MO8J7W2E6BcH7rlsxu1swUlJLmlhK8uE2mmkUBGWU5KIf6iqHKjiCw56+6N0 s5EAfUSPQwKzYwIXpIqZVDBbi5ZwYKKg1LyKCkEZ0syf6Pgnt4crpElK4ypBos8Urhdo MYNtfDoBKh7x+4fu8xR6m7kNAgePY8nnjd62HfDJ8wyJUA5bmm7vb8vunWvIJ/i0YyVN pME6Q0nDUlavGI/7I8YBtqySHPUnVJ5a7Tx69L766YI66vmQueza7nrH3rmaknXN2O9I 6Bf2RhIep7N9wvv+tiWoc9lPtRabZXp2lmYj1nSKbpYuamCAtqog09hAs4W5/nVJsBij NM+g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=r4Im2z5ZHZrfdbsK2appml7T3q+CwmKg0fpGFYMiaV8=; b=Mu9ZwUIy+t9WeHYa0cmhTrWPaK6LzllBwM82J/jfDIRJWvbdaDWWzkASVOnLsj2wVs Qk5U1exJ2YBk+eu+PTdMAd1WYNFr/bxV+NL7v8IR3BMFGbYjeNtk7HmEqLQN7bj5UR/Q NCwgPZ46014q8nLZLrMkjhkiV+VpgSTMwPg9W7vRTZVMLInQYIxQ+EvfoWqb/NeJ/bCd SUFg/fgcGM14PkL64x/T1kbDHJDjcRsn00AFCnaku1bggJByaQvrNRvrHS8JlyHDomPN A1OsWZ9Y6OMXWJsR49Iw+7U0PbKgaXJfvoCD7CejDXwdrN4viQFyFfrYevqN1sgL2eSb 3ekw== X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJJtVymMnUd+/Db/fC5jcmKMVrpk5vSiBhb5r9B0gpdoHi1eAtrhBoXPHkBw1zsEbQ== X-Received: by 10.25.141.203 with SMTP id p194mr235462lfd.68.1459995260221; Wed, 06 Apr 2016 19:14:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bass.home.chromatix.fi (37-33-67-252.bb.dnainternet.fi. [37.33.67.252]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d74sm836767lfb.49.2016.04.06.19.14.18 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 06 Apr 2016 19:14:19 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.2 \(3112\)) From: Jonathan Morton In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2016 05:14:15 +0300 Cc: Dave Taht , bloat Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: To: jb X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3112) Subject: Re: [Bloat] dslreports bufferbloat tests X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2016 02:14:21 -0000 > On 7 Apr, 2016, at 05:06, jb wrote: >=20 > But am I just looking for "ECN capable" flags originating from a given > public IP? > or am I filtering just for CE marks (11), indicating there was some > active queue management actually going on -- and only that would be > worth mentioning? The latter. CE marks indicate that the bottleneck router is using AQM = with ECN support. ECT marks only indicate that the traffic supports = ECN, not that it=E2=80=99s actually doing any good. Beware however that one or two ISPs are known to set CE on all traffic, = indiscriminately. You should be able to detect this by looking for CE = on SYN packets, which should never be there (ECN negotiation is = initiated through TCP flags, not the IP TOS byte). Report this to the = user as a problem. - Jonathan Morton