From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <swmike@swm.pp.se>
Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (swm.pp.se [212.247.200.143])
	(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 ED89F21F19A
	for <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 01:37:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501)
	id 441D9A1; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 10:36:58 +0100 (CET)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 403079C;
	Tue, 10 Dec 2013 10:36:58 +0100 (CET)
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 10:36:58 +0100 (CET)
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: MUSCARIELLO Luca IMT/OLN <luca.muscariello@orange.com>
In-Reply-To: <52A6D54D.5060504@orange.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1312101036090.24602@uplift.swm.pp.se>
References: <CDCB8ED7.2B776%ford@isoc.org>
	<26FB3C56-AF24-497C-943A-3FDAE7B88D08@isoc.org>
	<alpine.DEB.2.02.1312100739200.24602@uplift.swm.pp.se>
	<52A6D54D.5060504@orange.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14)
Organization: People's Front Against WWW
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Cc: bloat <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: [Bloat] CFP: Workshop on Reducing Internet Latency
X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13
Precedence: list
List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat <bloat.lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/options/bloat>,
	<mailto:bloat-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/bloat>
List-Post: <mailto:bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bloat-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat>,
	<mailto:bloat-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 09:37:01 -0000

On Tue, 10 Dec 2013, MUSCARIELLO Luca IMT/OLN wrote:

>> We actually did talk about having a self-service portal where the customer 
>> could choose their preferred profile, either fast (no interleaving), 4ms or 
>> 16 ms interleaving, and also their safety margin to 6, 9 or 12 dB. Fast or 
>> 4ms interleaving worked well with 12 dB SNR margin (which means lower 
>> latency but also lower access speeds), whereas 6dB margin often required 
>> 16ms interleaving to work well. 
>
> Was that successful? Did  customers use that?
> Usually it is not, but I'd like to know about your experience.

We only talked about it, it was never implemented (at least not when I was 
there). We however made the different profiles available to customer 
service, so customers could call in and have their profiles set to 
whatever suited them best.

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se