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 TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A41133B260
 for <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>; Thu,  8 Dec 2016 03:24:39 -0500 (EST)
Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501)
 id 3663DA7; Thu,  8 Dec 2016 09:24:38 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=swm.pp.se; s=mail;
 t=1481185478; bh=fdRe/2pL5SGBcl3V9UCpP3h5y1pYPXbOo2GZ/G/QD1Y=;
 h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From;
 b=1mZorlDr2P/LJRlvbsLkWYrpkjpx8g6KoE5Vt9OeJHVhDvXeKImNvVaK7b8PmQ8X5
 Nb2JPAhJ6MBf1X097ogqfXuLhTZRjl0aKRCTo8Zb9e2j54AtI5CST0u1LQS2c/DVj+
 I8lw1Ds2fBXPxI8yktPYA1OABYl/EiaEJr+FJIP0=
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F5BFA6;
 Thu,  8 Dec 2016 09:24:38 +0100 (CET)
Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 09:24:38 +0100 (CET)
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
cc: bloat <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAA93jw7DfMY4qHnbxYDUN8hfpgY_aNxa1LcyPKd6pa93qXe2Kw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1612080923010.1747@uplift.swm.pp.se>
References: <CAA93jw7DfMY4qHnbxYDUN8hfpgY_aNxa1LcyPKd6pa93qXe2Kw@mail.gmail.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
Subject: Re: [Bloat] TCP BBR paper is now generally available
X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20
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: Thu, 08 Dec 2016 08:24:39 -0000

On Fri, 2 Dec 2016, Dave Taht wrote:

> http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=3022184

"BBR converges toward a fair share of the bottleneck bandwidth whether 
competing with other BBR flows or with loss-based congestion control."

That's not what I took away from your tests of having BBR and Cubic flows 
together, where BBR just killed Cubic dead.

What has changed since? Have you re-done your tests with whatever has 
changed, I must have missed that? Or did I misunderstand?

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