From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: mail.toke.dk; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=; dkim=fail; arc=none (Message is not ARC signed); dmarc=fail (Used From Domain Record) header.from=uvic.ca policy.dmarc=none Received: from mail-yx1-f41.google.com (mail-yx1-f41.google.com [74.125.224.41]) by mail.toke.dk (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B37AE93563E for ; Sat, 08 Nov 2025 18:03:51 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-yx1-f41.google.com with SMTP id 956f58d0204a3-63fc72db706so1673574d50.2 for ; Sat, 08 Nov 2025 09:03:51 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1762621430; x=1763226230; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state:from :to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=VYI95q0Hrmd8WBtJlfkYXFhHqiCBa2sb0AJMwVp7m/g=; b=HnbpRebyDpPBekWDRPJ0PIkkYmPHq5KX2LnExZYPEwQWj4pNZ8Y6pKMOpzEEiG3zVx Cn2eyiT79l660E724flBLrjZcdUufYtS22i0IXjgPQRqlzkzu/E1Fhurndk0A+HBcnw9 XLGYpsYUTbCLI2q4LV8DhXhFe4xMK2WMOju35HVLlU/nRBD3F2v68/ilNunl4NT2jraY Thbh8GS2g8E5AqaydLPLI2pWQt6tHjf/15aGpa8BHbfbhcRGaOnnY28CE4DhWndHgrnq 348pN9GjE50Ss6FpSVuoA0X1X+/ASID9HKj7V2SOjp8/5U20UutiYCntJ9vzsh9TFMvV RS1g== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVLTKm9+0QpxJ5uLawmPcjGdj6wCfYhJZHHlmGQaSQfondHtHaWryTuTt7eLH3e+tyKX06PZA==@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yzq7RTZ9tPa/YCQHbVemWNIx10TcL5knXJG2wiyidaNu+c8fAKG snbBnzhZRBwjFytCtfvEktUl6s1xUzBK4aTw8lO/SLJdUtuE4WzHL7jPe8ir9oDyoegwJgAjysQ 5/VMhpxEVXgxYQB/8yO4Mx0Nu+nnENX0= X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnctPhlNGJ9Vyh9dD73qAs1wFwTMDTVRgisIk+sruODvG8yHNo7HZk6tIWrR/UOk WFPbCLH0ck4wOGOJ7pgalRtF3Mfy56G9DpTs1cDt2E3X9ZMos9liP5iuS+jmN1CZM/NNeyunKas SFQgtnpJrrj9aYTlBZrEGlpYJ43WXSClsLQ+yw0lq3O97CJTcvuRy84F0MWSI+b3R4WtUskzRAe tCViHoVCXtGvqjWqrnms0D7KqoJqiB1vVrZDSxioF3BCNN8rg5aIvymYPPAumYjbSlsc/g= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGyLJDmaZx9cH7AmrBirhbXQofYl749utAHcfC37EnLQQ58js5SvfrbeaS8qbh0MM1YoBb5SXh6Oqp2uxT+gNc= X-Received: by 2002:a05:690e:254d:b0:63f:9a42:f21 with SMTP id 956f58d0204a3-640d4542752mr2045780d50.19.1762621430021; Sat, 08 Nov 2025 09:03:50 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <9390D9DA-3C77-429F-A41D-E0FECD52FF06@connectivitycap.com> <2036296F-1567-4B66-BD8C-3AB49EBD5AA3@connectivitycap.com> <3934C9BE-EED5-4DF7-9451-E438E0FEFE3E@connectivitycap.com> In-Reply-To: From: J Pan Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2025 09:03:39 -0800 X-Gm-Features: AWmQ_bmJlclJ0Cdkaanmdq8SVfXgIt3CRCv6gxbR0ZyOgJ9UciBngC-uUxcdfIM Message-ID: To: dan Cc: Jim Forster , Frantisek Borsik , Cake List , bloat , codel@lists.bufferbloat.net, libreqos , l4s-discuss@ietf.org, starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MailFrom: panatuvicdotca@gmail.com X-Mailman-Rule-Hits: nonmember-moderation X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation Message-ID-Hash: HOWNLBZQZL4I7ZZECKMHEZLQ7GIZ2LNJ X-Message-ID-Hash: HOWNLBZQZL4I7ZZECKMHEZLQ7GIZ2LNJ X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 08 Nov 2025 21:54:18 +0100 X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list Subject: [Cake] Re: [LibreQoS] Re: [Starlink] Re: Keynote: QoE/QoS - Bandwidth Is A Lie! at WISPAPALOOZA 2025 (October 16) List-Id: Cake - FQ_codel the next generation Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: yes, availability (at least two competing network providers with reliable services), affordability (so the competition to bring the price and cost down) and applicability to modern internet applications (video streaming, conferencing and gaming in addition to email and web browsing) shall be the user-centric metrics in addition to throughput, latency/jitter, packet loss, etc -- J Pan, UVic CSc, ECS566, 250-472-5796 (NO VM), Pan@UVic.CA, Web.UVic.CA/~pa= n On Sat, Nov 8, 2025 at 8:00=E2=80=AFAM dan wrote: > > I'm starting to see the signs that raw bandwidth is starting to lose > it's dominance for marketing. It's still the clear #1 ask but price > is rapidly overtaking speed for our customer requests. > > I believe we've hit this era's threshold on throughput needs and > people have started to notice that 'more' doesn't feel like a faster > service. > > one common scenario that we are using to win customers, in combination > with facebook testimonials, is that people have bad experiences with > wifi and they order a faster service from cable/fiber company and the > wifi just gets worse. This scenario I think is incredibly common and > seems to be a catalyst for 'speed isn't everything'. We come in with > 50-500Mbps of service and solid whole-home wifi and they are > converted. > > I hope we're not to far off from having 'speed' be just a feature, not > the entire story. > > and yes, we QoE or service with cake via libreqos which is the > difference between great service and inadequate service IMO. > > On Fri, Nov 7, 2025 at 12:50=E2=80=AFPM J Pan via LibreQoS > wrote: > > > > marketing is even worse. some claim 200mbps because 150mbps down and > > 50mbps up at peak data rate. of course, this is not the only problem > > in telecom, but likely the worst > > > > nevertheless, there are stats such as 10% inflation for food and 20% > > for gas, so in total 30% ;-) at this rate, any numbers can be floating > > around but none are telling the truth ;-) > > -- > > J Pan, UVic CSc, ECS566, 250-472-5796 (NO VM), Pan@UVic.CA, Web.UVic.CA= /~pan > > > > On Fri, Nov 7, 2025 at 10:55=E2=80=AFAM Jim Forster wrote: > > > > > > Exactly so. > > > > > > Consumer expectations and service provider marketing may be influence= d by memories of experience when transmission delay did matter. At one tim= e I was very happy with my home ISDN connection, and even shared it with my= neighbor. At about 128kbs, it was three orders of magnitude slower than m= y home fiber link. I=E2=80=99ve not run the numbers but I=E2=80=99m pretty= sure transimission speed mattered for video, even for crummy quality video= , So then when I learned a bit about digital video, and cable=E2=80=99s 64= QAM 27mbps channels, I got excited and thought, =E2=80=9Cwow, they could d= eliver 1mbps service! And wouldn=E2=80=99t it be cool to have 1M home onli= ne at 10x the speed of ISDN?=E2=80=9D. It was cool! And two more orders o= f magnitude later, here we are. > > > > > > =E2=80=94 Jim > > > > > > On Nov 7, 2025, at 12:52=E2=80=AFPM, J Pan wrote: > > > > > > latency is based on round-trip time, and one-way delay includes > > > transmission delay, propagation delay, queuing delay and processing > > > delay. bandwidth does affect transmission delay (or serialization > > > delay), propagation delay is determined by the link length and the > > > "travel" speed of the signal, queuing delay is the hardest part and > > > affected by the buffer bloat a lot, and processing delay is another > > > variable. of course, transmission delay takes less and less portion o= f > > > the end-to-end delay now due to higher and higher "speed" links > > > > > > consumers may mistaken the speed of the link (the "width" of their > > > pipe) as how fast their internet is (the "length" of the pipe), due t= o > > > the poor terminology we have been using ;-) > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > LibreQoS mailing list -- libreqos@lists.bufferbloat.net > > To unsubscribe send an email to libreqos-leave@lists.bufferbloat.net