From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qe0-x22d.google.com (mail-qe0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c02::22d]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C458D21F19A for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 05:58:18 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qe0-f45.google.com with SMTP id 6so6374029qea.4 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 05:58:17 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=lDwhSJKw+sdmb9b/BghlaIdcsHhFQr1vwcctC1ngBRY=; b=MwJbrYYZUEYmV4Q4HiCh8xQYq4cgwfkmPl7qqHW9xRRlANBg3eZ9ge5ijlYzYBj7Zx 9c/+7NeT6T1Hy9+1rzkm8dpfl9S5r9kEp4Gf8kDOt1hxVUiV/cFLYGgxppi+MKKG28yl 8RKChW3gjZ5va6t8PH2hWFXsUkjA8O6G6z+l12y44T/L3iPyphkX3ZD1/UZBqDmdh9ce VRSgaPcs9iZTfd9PVUMF1896f2OP+Oz1s7XvoTvZnnSseylgZ6iID62tfOx6UvuZEBi1 KPJjEsbWpAmDuVW+qxsRaHmIjaGocc1cChHHiPyYOeSwdUqau/SMTuqqtTyWuRPpWcFs UeeA== X-Received: by 10.224.121.140 with SMTP id h12mr2887886qar.41.1387375097674; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 05:58:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from richs-mbp-1684.home.lan (pool-72-87-56-202.ptldme.east.myfairpoint.net. [72.87.56.202]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id 4sm245038qak.11.2013.12.18.05.58.16 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 18 Dec 2013 05:58:17 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.0 \(1822\)) From: Rich Brown In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 08:58:05 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <0E267F91-3CC8-48F4-92C0-AD8BACA98FCC@gmail.com> References: <34E77F64-739C-49E4-B8A4-6ABBEAE4174B@gmail.com> <8DB84101-C942-49C4-99F0-6C9319961297@gmail.com> <22176178-A50F-48F2-A3A1-D3853764AD0E@gmail.com> To: Sebastian Moeller X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1822) Cc: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] cerowrt-3.10.24-5 dev build released X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 13:58:19 -0000 I like David Lang=92s questions: 1) If we had =93full knowledge=94 of the customer=92s link, how many = different cases would we have to take into account? 2) What happens if we get it wrong? And I think I understand Sebastian Moeller=92s answers: 1) People using ATM-based carriers need the ATM link layer adaptation = calculation; others (PTM, Cable, Fiber, etc.) don=92t need that = calculation. 2) Getting it wrong hurts in each case, but it seems worse where people = are using PTM or Ethernet-based links since they lose 10% of their = bandwidth due to the 48 in 53 bytes encapsulation. Failure to use the = ATM calculation over an ATM-based link makes VoIP etc. less good and = fails to make CeroWrt stand out as a great solution, but it=92s the = status quo for the entire world. If the choices are as =93simple=94 as this (and please correct me if I=92m= wrong :-) we really want to find a way to encourage people to use the = ATM calculation when it=92s warranted. We could hope that they find = their way to the AQM tab (before their eyes glaze over), but that seems = too big a hurdle. Perhaps we could extend the Interface configuration page to add a =93Link = uses DSL/ADSL:=94 checkbox right below the Protocol dropdown. Default = would be off, but when customers go to the GE00 interface to enter their = PPPoE/PPPoATM/ISP credentials, they=92d see this additional checkbox. = Checking it would feed that info to the AQM tab. (And perhaps there = could be a link there either to the AQM tab, or to the wiki for more = information.) Best, Rich=