From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-la0-x22b.google.com (mail-la0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::22b]) (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 EB2B521F50C; Wed, 3 Sep 2014 20:36:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-la0-f43.google.com with SMTP id gi9so302699lab.16 for ; Wed, 03 Sep 2014 20:36:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=vp9vQ1Ff34CnVjuiscGqe0G/jfgwt907nmxUIrMfQBg=; b=iWAEw1E1KTIrJ3m1nqFiEXc8OUQ+xBtHOdeWToKz6wmvnrnQ3fC15d6P18PpVnQu3W EvtInr60ifnbtuxZ53J8zbOK/1pfyUvDUnGowYYkgeiRqRq3fsE/lMPZUrwGZeOl9RNw E5vl/Ag3iR0aobzIwpVCHo5aHofp0ys1F13K/IsBzBSxAyZLXcZNQBoRVYM65zuN3N3I cZB3NpivwnhhZNuVphe9aqtplmQKxL1c5xTmPrdD9tr+tyQheTIb3j8GrYvg1eXlgSmh sl9fAL1BPIARKBlAodB6GCHvczUL8juP7eyHrhfAElCfa77N6FdCfA/S+sQOCCauQzkI fRbA== X-Received: by 10.112.78.38 with SMTP id y6mr1435324lbw.94.1409801783887; Wed, 03 Sep 2014 20:36:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bass.home.chromatix.fi (176-93-13-237.bb.dnainternet.fi. [176.93.13.237]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id f6sm1699051lae.7.2014.09.03.20.36.21 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 03 Sep 2014 20:36:23 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Jonathan Morton In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2014 06:36:20 +0300 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <1432376F-45FC-475C-846E-4E3B4759902B@gmail.com> References: <87ppfijfjc.fsf@toke.dk> <4FF4917C-1B6D-4D5F-81B6-5FC177F12BFC@gmail.com> <4DA71387-6720-4A2F-B462-2E1295604C21@gmail.com> <0DB9E121-7073-4DE9-B7E2-73A41BCBA1D1@gmail.com> <0D3E3220-C12A-4238-974B-D83D13EF354E@gmail.com> <83C39F40-5D07-43B4-8D3A-5A087CCB2735@gmx.de> To: Dave Taht X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085) Cc: "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" , "Bill Ver Steeg \(versteb\)" , bloat Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] [Bloat] Comcast upped service levels -> WNDR3800 can't cope... 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: Thu, 04 Sep 2014 03:36:55 -0000 On 4 Sep, 2014, at 3:33 am, Dave Taht wrote: > Gigabit "routers", indeed, when only the switch is cable of that! I have long thought that advertising regulators need to have a *lot* = more teeth. Right now, even when a decision comes down that an advert = is blatantly misleading, all they can really do is say "please don't do = it again". Here's a reasonably typical example: = http://www.asa.org.uk/Rulings/Adjudications/2014/8/British-Telecommunicati= ons-plc/SHP_ADJ_265259.aspx Many adverts and marketing techniques that I believe are misleading (at = best) are never even considered by the regulators, probably because few = people outside the technical community even understand that a problem = exists, and those that do tend to seriously bungle the solution (not = least because they get lobbied by the special interests). It's bad enough that there's an ISO standard inexplicably defining a = megabyte as 1,024,000 bytes, for storage-media purposes. Yes, that's = not a typo - it's 2^10 * 10^3. That official standard supposedly = justifies all those "1.44MB" floppy disks (with a raw unformatted = capacity of 1440KB), and the "terabyte" hard disks that are actually a = full 10% smaller than 2^40 bytes. SSDs often use the "slack" between = the definitions to implement the necessary error-correction and = wear-levelling overhead without changing the marketable number (so 256GB = of flash chips installed, 256GB capacity reported to the consumer, but = there's a 7% difference between the two). Honestly though, they can get away with calling them "gigabit routers" = because they have "gigabit" external interfaces. They can also point to = all the PCI GigE NICs that can only do 750Mbps, because that's where the = PCI bus saturates, but nobody prevents *them* from being labelled = 1000base-T and therefore "gigabit ethernet". It's worse in the wireless world because the headline rate is the = maximum signalling rate under ideal conditions. The actual throughput = under typical home/office/conference conditions bears zero resemblance = to that figure for any number of reasons, but even under ideal = conditions the actual throughput is a surprisingly small fraction of the = signalling rate. Consumer reports type stuff could be interesting, though. I haven't = seen any of the big tech-review sites take on networking seriously, = except for basic throughput checks on bare Ethernet (which mostly reveal = whether a GigE chipset is attached via PCI or PCIe). It's a complicated = subject; Anandtech conceded that accurate tests of the KillerNIC's = marketing claims were particularly difficult to arrange, but they did a = lot of subjective testing in an attempt to compensate. One could, in principle, give out a bronze award for equipment which = fails to meet (the spirit of) its marketing claims, but is still useful = in the real world. A silver award for equipment which *does* meet its = marketing claims and generally works as it should. A gold award would = be reserved for equipment which both merits a silver award and genuinely = stands out in the market. And at the opposite end of the scale, a = "rusty pipe" award for truly excrable efforts, similar to LowEndMac's = "Road Apple" award. All protected by copyright and trademark laws, = which are rather easier to enforce in a legally binding manner than = advertising regulations. Incidentally, for those amused (or frustrated) by embedded hardware = design decisions, the "Road Apple" awards list is well worth a read - = and potentially eye-opening. Watch out for the PowerPC Mac with dual = 16-bit I/O buses. - Jonathan Morton