Re: [Bloat] fixing bufferbloat on bigpond cable...

[Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>]

Hi,

Just to clarify -- the credit goes to 'saltspork' on that thread, not I :)

Cheers,


> On 12 Mar 2015, at 1:11 pm, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I was very pleased to see this tweet go by today:
> 
> https://twitter.com/mnot/status/575581792650018816
> 
> where Mark Nottingham fixed his bufferbloat on bigpond cable
> using a very simple htb + fq_codel script. (I note ubnt edgerouters
> also have a nice gui for that, as does openwrt)
> 
> But: he does point out a flaw in netanalyzr's current tests[1], in that
> it does not correctly detect the presence of aqm or FQing on the link,
> (in part due to not running long enough, and also in not using
> multiple distinct flows) and like the "ping loss considered harmful"
> thread last week on the aqm and bloat lists, matching user
> expectations and perceptions would be good with any public
> tests that exist.
> 
> There is some stuff in the aqm evaluation guide's "burst tolerance"
> tests that sort of applies, but... ideas?
> 
> [1] I am not aware of any other tests for FQ than mine, which are still
> kind of hacky. What I have is in my isochronous repo on github.
> 
> -- 
> Dave Täht
> Let's make wifi fast, less jittery and reliable again!
> 
> https://plus.google.com/u/0/107942175615993706558/posts/TVX3o84jjmb

--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/