From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lf0-x244.google.com (mail-lf0-x244.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::244]) (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 97D0E3B2A0 for ; Sat, 18 Jun 2016 06:24:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-lf0-x244.google.com with SMTP id l188so1661612lfe.0 for ; Sat, 18 Jun 2016 03:24:55 -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=ZCJcO3x7k8cKJguBo3IQjRyR5BcbgPc6Ni24OZTnc48=; b=mcvO1yoQMtcRUpaU6Bm5zE/SYTFuEY/Zo4r4EIcFU+TE3bSSxtYMMHWxxKElP/dPwR t4K+8oaqzkbUodjnn/xPzIaOR2rbUXSvJICctK5i85+97zw/+SSDQex1xodP9bXWrBXp uFpLT+VheZwZw2pAZlL7NanOTH9BcAsMMoepAvXH3FPSlS3/VbU1x4Amf5Mmga1015Sv YTjRFzc+40wjlYOguyvmG53xtQRTWNmfJqHFEs4CM0KbzAw6stcIaHZEXuk5pGYX1kFj Ur+pfgNcRi0m3PxpWuFy8+iw9ODsEl0ptBHxFDJuN4AxvQ9+UH3Oo+rZKa+bA+cov6Kl ElOA== 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=ZCJcO3x7k8cKJguBo3IQjRyR5BcbgPc6Ni24OZTnc48=; b=VoNV+XoACzpApTjc56AakagJqdZYdWa24+wR6V3HsPpw24ijkz5Uk+nGiHeHxZfEOB 2TzBMUy5ER/AvOPUANGXJGEs3IQDqbU30AugvVecqFHpfajCDYRrVmEjP/nPM4BVwz9N jjo+sos7diwaJCJtFYQ3HhA6qp2DEBFCGNjCY3dW7XJfKZK9QKWaBWmUqprG5xKluBr0 oczUwwxKZW3jHWDnJwqaU8SglgQIq2qulJjwFaVkLRnFjMxepYp4Yv2UmVRHWjeZ55Z7 8qqUm3TE3yJ8+BYxBwAFbc1/TBboqqoytjPdoMrrTaiX8mMzIDFsdPeI1jptUNdfByAP upCw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tLyr4GgfWsJ4Tc2Ptz+YEKLQyWYGxm4uexGalDomVbRijbB4TixXt6bvddg2LoZZQ== X-Received: by 10.25.18.90 with SMTP id h87mr1456740lfi.183.1466245494418; Sat, 18 Jun 2016 03:24:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bass.home.chromatix.fi (37-33-112-183.bb.dnainternet.fi. [37.33.112.183]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id xq6sm3364030lbb.6.2016.06.18.03.24.52 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sat, 18 Jun 2016 03:24:53 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) From: Jonathan Morton In-Reply-To: <57652072.7020708@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2016 13:24:50 +0300 Cc: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <57650074.90106@gmail.com> <57652072.7020708@gmail.com> To: Jan Ceuleers X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) Subject: Re: [Bloat] ultrafast broadband conference june 27-30 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: Sat, 18 Jun 2016 10:24:55 -0000 > On 18 Jun, 2016, at 13:20, Jan Ceuleers = wrote: >=20 >> These buffers are not inherent to the link technology. >> If they were, we=E2=80=99d be calling for different link technology. >=20 > Thanks for confirming my suspicions. But this is exactly what Dave was > doing, since he blamed the uplink bloat on "g.fast technologies". >=20 > So it seems that you and I agree that it's not G.fast itself that is > bloated, but the lack of proper buffer management in certain (most?) = DSL > modems, regardless of whether they support G.fast or some other = flavour > of DSL. Right. We=E2=80=99re hoping that G.fast, being a new link technology, = has taken on board some of the extensive research into buffer sizing and = management, in typical device implementations. But we=E2=80=99re not = holding our breath - the industry is rather stubborn on this point. - Jonathan Morton