From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ee0-f53.google.com (mail-ee0-f53.google.com [74.125.83.53]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1278F21F175 for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2012 04:21:06 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ee0-f53.google.com with SMTP id c50so967578eek.12 for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2012 04:21:04 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:from:mime-version:content-type:subject:date:in-reply-to :to:references:message-id:x-mailer; bh=VlDDDsQIaf+fT5e+ivu2F2Gl4hUDVmShtHj4z1T8WOw=; b=ljoqcS+0lLh+ayA49BoRh1YcqGhVtnNXn2kJfnCIoTJv37UKR8Qw+3JmawMbHhQoua r0KthAYTZKdfwnNxmoejR6Q4UC8MnLcgnL7aYO4lRT9+5wnYg+ZkH5ATgSCIJQg5La3I 6D1j9MD8kx1cDQjZH+kr+vPE3jGUw8uLvcqIF/24SQmUaaBVOvVaBaGXyBxiHZh8LJu7 7DS5cClIDzjjf1T1+R/pbOTmgFfwyuNmG6XFMhhTOdzIFARRllDsVNd/Z6/Wn/10oBUc XPLHRBFYxty85lvjJ1wYUOgvnMEV+EZp0uh35NPXBnxmPen8gxmrkY0HAZngdvaOJWTU q2bg== X-Received: by 10.14.223.200 with SMTP id v48mr13957129eep.24.1355919664452; Wed, 19 Dec 2012 04:21:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from bass.home.chromatix.fi (xdsl-83-150-84-172.nebulazone.fi. [83.150.84.172]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id v46sm8950238eep.1.2012.12.19.04.21.01 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 19 Dec 2012 04:21:02 -0800 (PST) From: Jonathan Morton Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-1--344663647 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 14:20:58 +0200 In-Reply-To: <50D1AD8A.1020907@net.t-labs.tu-berlin.de> To: bloat Mainlinglist References: <54532012A5393D4E8F57704A4D55237E3CE5C5E7@CH1PRD0510MB381.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <50C89427.8080505@net.t-labs.tu-berlin.de> <50D1AD8A.1020907@net.t-labs.tu-berlin.de> Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085) Subject: Re: [Bloat] Bufferbloat at LUG talk - Meeting Report 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: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 12:21:07 -0000 --Apple-Mail-1--344663647 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I think we're talking about the "many tabs open" problem. But this bothers me as well, actually. Lots of tabs shouldn't affect the = network unless some of the pages in them are actively transferring data = for some reason. I've seen lots of pages that have heavy animation or = Javascript in them, but unless Facebook is even nastier than I was = previously aware of, that doesn't really translate to high network = traffic. On the other hand, actively browsing the Web does produce traffic. That = is entirely feasible and even useful to do during a Skype call. - Jonathan Morton On Dec 19, 2012 2:06 PM, "Oliver Hohlfeld" = wrote: > Every TCP transfer (which may be collection of web page accesses) that = reaches an instantaneous packet rate in-excess of the capacity of the = most constrained network element on the path causes such problems. Which problems? I'm missing the relation to my original post. Oliver _______________________________________________ Bloat mailing list Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat --Apple-Mail-1--344663647 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

I think we're talking about the "many tabs open" problem.

But this bothers me as well, actually. Lots of tabs shouldn't affect the network unless some of the pages in them are actively transferring data for some reason. I've seen lots of pages that have heavy animation or Javascript in them, but unless Facebook is even nastier than I was previously aware of, that doesn't really translate to high network traffic.

On the other hand, actively browsing the Web does produce traffic. That is entirely feasible and even useful to do during a Skype call.

- Jonathan Morton

On Dec 19, 2012 2:06 PM, "Oliver Hohlfeld" <oliver@net.t-labs.tu-berlin.de> wrote:
> Every TCP transfer (which may be collection of web page accesses) that reaches an instantaneous packet rate in-excess of the capacity of the most constrained network element on the path causes such problems.

Which problems? I'm missing the relation to my original post.

Oliver
_______________________________________________
Bloat mailing list
Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
--Apple-Mail-1--344663647--