From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from omr1.cc.vt.edu (omr1.cc.ipv6.vt.edu [IPv6:2001:468:c80:2105:0:2fc:76e3:30de]) (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 6CC9521F29E for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2015 16:32:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mr5.cc.vt.edu (mr5.cc.vt.edu [198.82.141.27] (may be forged)) by omr1.cc.vt.edu (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t2HNWTZL011016; Tue, 17 Mar 2015 19:32:29 -0400 Received: from auth1.smtp.vt.edu (auth1.smtp.vt.edu [198.82.161.152] (may be forged)) by mr5.cc.vt.edu (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t2HNWOLr016948; Tue, 17 Mar 2015 19:32:29 -0400 Received: from turing-police.cc.vt.edu ([IPv6:2001:468:c80:2103:6998:e983:c4f9:9de0]) (authenticated bits=0) by auth1.smtp.vt.edu (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t2HNWMlG005216 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 17 Mar 2015 19:32:23 -0400 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.8.0 04/21/2012 with nmh-1.6+dev To: Matt Taggart In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 16 Mar 2015 13:35:32 -0700." <20150316203532.05BD21E2@taggart.lackof.org> From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu References: <20150316203532.05BD21E2@taggart.lackof.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="==_Exmh_1426635142_27745P"; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 19:32:22 -0400 Message-ID: <123130.1426635142@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=disabled version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on mr5.cc.vt.edu Cc: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] DOCSIS 3+ recommendation? 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: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 23:33:02 -0000 --==_Exmh_1426635142_27745P Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Mon, 16 Mar 2015 13:35:32 -0700, Matt Taggart said: > Hi cerowrt-devel, > > My cable internet provider (Comcast) has been pestering me (monthly email > and robocalls) to upgrade my cable modem to something newer. But I _like_ > my current one (no wifi, battery backup) and it's been very stable and can > handle the data rates I am paying for. But they are starting to roll out > faster service plans and I guess it would be good to have that option (and > eventually they will probably boost the speed of the plan I'm paying for). > So... > > Any recommendations for cable modems that are known to be solid and less > bufferbloated? I've been using the Motorola Surfboard SB6141 on Comcast with good results. Anybody got a good suggestion on how to test a cablemodem for bufferbloat, or what you can do about it anyhow (given that firmware is usually pushed from the ISP side)? --==_Exmh_1426635142_27745P Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 iQIVAwUBVQi5hgdmEQWDXROgAQJ3NQ/+MTnSec+YUVBHW8ptrX34fsgUf/RTqQ68 hBxolcUxG9Zp8pww8pXUb7DXoDNsNJM2fvvLp3VTkYfnMIOSzpN/GyScnuR5LG0W xAPQrN6EvWBXXIfYUuSIqHv4GQ40o7HYLRcB+zTINJP/B2ihBVcF1vflg6SQY+rL W0/IWJDnNP5YYvaOjEJPzlGw23ppnoqufQX2FXX2HA0R/FvSc8c42MWo9eCuvCoB /8QRAKRz6YxHAqy3tHMhUe8sYD/khCEy8IQ3mXe4MsxfRU2ghQdUxT0hsBskfsgF rmntVoOPK7M1mZoW0tM5a6HBvOUrosslfXdxi2/qsDnXCb8yL1WEXpTltVnW1pr+ kWLOUCi7M+0TOnNnuZGCIQvaf/qZNSndL9MRXgg86o1G7gsHDGZaU6SzLE3Qt4gT 7cDIZKed86DiD8ihErNDUSN/knD1SHWZZdBoyA2GTjosq3X3z9NiPiYdsyXd205Y JLz7iYN+t2YyZSjQolRgi/igoMJieNDws4vFn6nE0Ta/SKp90Nz9Emb5yHnhBMvE QjSsr1HozlxYa+JsQA8teuAVZqAqz34JTRAnmqlU/NIOlpgytYvLDIqCT7wpWa1a cUni5xYoRYJYh8cG1UMyiQf9zuTHdSdJV6I44y4q5iAriPMWY14ZzoOyCVLmlOET m+/tdKJuygs= =Y6G3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --==_Exmh_1426635142_27745P--