From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (ipv6.swm.pp.se [IPv6:2a00:801::f]) (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 0E13921F1D1 for ; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 04:04:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id 308AEA1; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 13:04:01 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=swm.pp.se; s=mail; t=1430219041; bh=ZN1MujjCJZ7mE0idwW/SiFTAJqaa4r0SjOhpAEUYf4Q=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=UBONmSB7qrjYp6B0PHwl0GNIiwqcBJ5FRo/UGH9vIbzP7UO7yhgfD52mZocE6l98H hLyIDbZtCcO7uAWrsiP2o98iklJSlwuGommJibEYwEIrjutDase4KSikUYCgMJ5FY+ oJoGfn0Vkq7/MdeTJWlRJOEWNvbkMAE/d5PgVM7s= Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E3D19F; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 13:04:01 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 13:04:01 +0200 (CEST) From: Mikael Abrahamsson To: David Lang In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <5537CDB7.60301@orange.com> <1429722979.18561.112.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com> <5537DA20.1090008@orange.com> <5537DE4D.8090100@orange.com> <553882D7.4020301@orange.com> <1429771718.22254.32.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com> <6C0D04CF-53AA-4D18-A4E4-B746AF6487C7@gmx.de> <87wq123p5r.fsf@toke.dk> <2288B614-B415-4017-A842-76E8F5DFDE4C@gmx.de> <553B06CE.1050209@superduper.net> <14ceed3c818.27f7.e972a4f4d859b00521b2b659602cb2f9@superduper.net> <0C930D43-A05B-48E2-BC01-792CAA72CAD1@gmx.de> <1D70AD75-F177-4146-A4D6-2FD6DB408B63@gmx.de> 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 Subject: Re: [Bloat] DSLReports Speed Test has latency measurement built-in 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: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 11:04:33 -0000 On Tue, 28 Apr 2015, David Lang wrote: > Voice is actually remarkably tolerant of pure latency. While 60ms of jitter > makes a connection almost unusalbe, a few hundred ms of consistant latency > isn't a problem. IIRC (from my college days when ATM was the new, hot > technology) you have to get up to around a second of latency before > pure-consistant latency starts to break things. I would say most people start to get trouble when talking to each other when the RTT exceeds around 500-600ms. I mostly agree with http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/voice/voice-quality/5125-delay-details.html but RTT of over 500ms is not fun. You basically can't have a heated argument/discussion when the RTT is higher than this :P -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se