From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mxout-07.mxes.net (mxout-07.mxes.net [216.86.168.182]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 69F6B21F0BC for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2015 19:14:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.154] (unknown [120.149.147.132]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D30B722E263; Wed, 11 Mar 2015 22:14:05 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2070.6\)) From: Mark Nottingham In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 13:14:03 +1100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: To: Dave Taht X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2070.6) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 07:41:04 -0700 Cc: "aqm@ietf.org" , netalyzr , bloat Subject: Re: [Bloat] fixing bufferbloat on bigpond cable... 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: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 02:14:42 -0000 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 wrote: >=20 > I was very pleased to see this tweet go by today: >=20 > https://twitter.com/mnot/status/575581792650018816 >=20 > 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) >=20 > 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. >=20 > There is some stuff in the aqm evaluation guide's "burst tolerance" > tests that sort of applies, but... ideas? >=20 > [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. >=20 > --=20 > Dave T=C3=A4ht > Let's make wifi fast, less jittery and reliable again! >=20 > https://plus.google.com/u/0/107942175615993706558/posts/TVX3o84jjmb -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/