From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.20]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mout.gmx.net", Issuer "TeleSec ServerPass DE-1" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 288ED21F1A1 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2015 02:46:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from hms-beagle-2.lan ([134.2.89.70]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx101) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MIiHs-1YOj1l258K-002EWp; Thu, 26 Feb 2015 11:46:01 +0100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) From: Sebastian Moeller In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 11:45:57 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <201502250806.t1P86o5N011632@bagheera.jungle.bt.co.uk> <4A80D1F9-F4A1-4D14-AC75-958C5A2E8168@gmx.de> <3F47B274-B0E4-44F2-A434-E3C9F7D5D041@ifi.uio.no> <87twyaffv3.fsf@toke.dk> <87pp8yfe0s.fsf@toke.dk> <54EEE0D2.1060606@orange.com> To: Mikael Abrahamsson X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:zMMcocw1rv3zH+46o85yHoScHl6WODHEMR85FGyH/MScuaHHj0Q ux0JBYpPd4Yn0fCkzpBIRuKWNT2dm7puvfS/72PPZaFlcE7tkxDWKuzcq8AthkeDOb55XPq It2aGRFkrAiIm62yHEBFkEzY8f5U33/YJietZuo/UZdq9i6MY2mT8M0Qe+56fdhbweNptpk 2mytNGM+zKmUIQ84dIHqw== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1; Cc: "bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net" Subject: Re: [Bloat] RED against bufferbloat 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, 26 Feb 2015 10:46:47 -0000 Hi Mikael, On Feb 26, 2015, at 11:39 , Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > On Thu, 26 Feb 2015, MUSCARIELLO Luca IMT/OLN wrote: >=20 >> I wonder when we'll have software routers in residential networks to = innovate a little faster than what happens today just like how already = happens in some data centers. >=20 > Well, it would help if operators tried to buy CPEs taht were not only = bare-minimum for what they need today. What is quite ironic is that many operators now switched to = charge rental fees for their under-powered, and not timely upgraded = devices, rent that could easily be used to purchase far more capable = devices (that would actually justify the rental fee). >=20 > Right now I hear more about "virtualised CPE" to save cost (ie move = part of the CPE implementation to the data center) than to spend more = money on features in the CPE. Well, the ingress traffic shaping definitely should be = virtualized upstream of the actual CPE! >=20 > My hope is still on the mobile phone SoCs trickling down to the home = gateway space so we get more CPU power there at decent price point. But do we know whether mobile phone SOCs actually make good = routers? Best Regards Sebastian >=20 > Also possibly that the whole SDN movement means hardware will get = standardized APIs so in case there is hardware acceleration on the CPE, = this can be handled by any kernel and not just the kernel that the = vendor has modified to work with their special hardware. >=20 > --=20 > Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se > _______________________________________________ > Bloat mailing list > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat