Re: [Bloat] bufferbloat paper

[David Lang <david@lang.hm>]

On Tue, 8 Jan 2013, Mark Allman wrote:

>>> Did any of their 90 homes contained laptops connected over WiFi?
>>
>> Almost certinly,
>
> Yeah - they nearly for sure did.  (See the note I sent to bloat@ this
> morning.)
>
>> but if the connection from the laptop to the AP is 54M and the
>> connection from the AP to the Internet is 1G, you are not going to
>> have a lot of buffering taking place. You will have no buffering on
>> the uplink side, and while you will have some buffering on the
>> downlink side, 54M is your slowest connection and it takes a
>> significantly large amount of data in flight to fill that for seconds.
>
> 54Mbps *might* be your slowest link.  It also could be somewhere before
> incoming traffic gets anywhere close to any of the CCZ gear.  E.g., if
> the traffic is from my DSL line the bottleneck will be < 1Mbps and on my
> end of the connection.

Wait a min here, from everything prior to this it was sounding like you were in 
a fiber-to-the-home experimental area that had 1G all the way to the houses, no 
DSL involved.

Are we all minunderstanding this?

David Lang

> But, regardless, none of this matters for the results presented in the
> paper because our measurements factor out the local residences.  Again,
> see the paper and the note I sent this morning.  The measurements are
> taken between our monitor (which is outside the local homes) and the
> remote host somewhere out across the Internet.  We are measuring
> wide-area and remote-side networks, not the local FTTH network.
>
> allman
>
>
>
>