From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <laurent@guerby.net>
Received: from lists.tetaneutral.net (lists.tetaneutral.net [91.224.149.207])
	by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B5A321F317;
	Fri, 16 May 2014 01:08:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by lists.tetaneutral.net (Postfix, from userid 501)
	id C8C2C48012; Fri, 16 May 2014 10:08:52 +0200 (CEST)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on
	lists.tetaneutral.net
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=7.0 tests=HELO_NO_DOMAIN
	autolearn=unavailable version=3.3.2
Received: from [IPv6:2a01:6600:8081:a500::1] (ip165-ipv6.tetaneutral.net
	[IPv6:2a01:6600:8081:a500::1])
	by lists.tetaneutral.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E01B44800A;
	Fri, 16 May 2014 10:08:49 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <1400227729.32180.1156.camel@pc2>
From: Laurent GUERBY <laurent@guerby.net>
To: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAA93jw4sboNcur7=EYLZ5XiGib76FU5hyHA2uck-y3cckerqjw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAA93jw4sboNcur7=EYLZ5XiGib76FU5hyHA2uck-y3cckerqjw@mail.gmail.com>
Organization: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.4.4-3 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 25 Jul 2014 11:16:22 -0700
Cc: cerowrt-devel <cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net>,
	bloat <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] [Bloat] fast lanes
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
	<cerowrt-devel.lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/options/cerowrt-devel>,
	<mailto:cerowrt-devel-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/cerowrt-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Help: <mailto:cerowrt-devel-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel>,
	<mailto:cerowrt-devel-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=subscribe>
Date: Fri, 16 May 2014 08:08:56 -0000
X-Original-Date: Fri, 16 May 2014 10:08:49 +0200
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 May 2014 08:08:56 -0000

On Thu, 2014-05-15 at 18:03 -0700, Dave Taht wrote:
> A side note: It's taken me a long time to finally realize what was
> wrong with level3's recent blog posting here:
> 
> http://blog.level3.com/global-connectivity/observations-internet-middleman/
> 
> The loss chart on the right here that they show to support their
> argument that the current interconnects are "incurring excessive delay
> and loss" fails utterly to support their argument -
> 
> http://blog.level3.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/route_info_1.jpg
> 
> It SHOULD show diurnal variance, and doesn't. The loss rates it shows
> are both consistent and quite low, compared to the bandwidth being
> used up, (indicating more of a cabling problem? or excessive load on
> the other switch? or?)

The right graph is in log scale while the left i linear,
I'd say they show the same pattern.

As for loss rate, may be the real "big" loss number is on another
interface in the chain.

Sincerely,

Laurent