[Cerowrt-devel] marketing #102 - giving netperf-wrapper a better name?

[Cerowrt-devel] marketing #102 - giving netperf-wrapper a better name?

[Dave Taht]

as netperf-wrapper has grown to include far more tests than netperf,
with quite a few more on their way, calling it this is increasingly
less appropriate:

A noted cynic wrote me privately last month, about netperf-wrapper:

'why don't you rename the friggin thing "bufferbloat" or
"bloattest" or something?  Netperf-wrapper is a terrible name,
seemingly still whatever the programmer called it when he wrote the
first sketchy version, one step up from "foo"'

Hmm...  we need a name with more foo, for sure, a better, more
descriptive name. Anyone got any ideas? Maybe run a contest somewhere?

One (technical) hope would be to find a good file extension for the
output, so it could be more easily parsed by browsers... but to heck
with that... a better name?

Toke had some ideas also:

- NQT - http://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/NQT - I especially like
  "Not Quite There". nqt.org points to this: http://dyslexiafoundation.org/nqt/

- NetQual - http://www.qoesystems.com/NETQUAL.html

- NQ-tester - doesn't seem to be taken by anything obvious


-- 
Dave Täht
Let's make wifi fast, less jittery and reliable again!

https://plus.google.com/u/0/107942175615993706558/posts/TVX3o84jjmb

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] marketing #102 - giving netperf-wrapper a better name?

[Toke Høiland-Jørgensen]

>seemingly still whatever the programmer called it when he wrote the
>first sketchy version, one step up from "foo"'

This is accurate, BTW. I'm terrible at naming...

Do yeah, what Dave said - suggestions welcome! :)

-Toke

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] [Bloat] marketing #102 - giving netperf-wrapper a better name?

[Dave Taht]

while I am at it the us trademark db is here:

http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=tess&state=4802:nateox.1.1

and welcome to the early 00s in terms of UI!

I do hope someone here comes up with a good idea for a better name, as
we sit and brainstorm for a while, here. The best I have come up with
yet is pretty terrible - bload - pronounced "blowed".


On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 4:48 PM, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am just going to stand aside for a while... I would like to have a
> file extension that worked (and also a website name that worked).
>
> You can do searches on:
>
> http://www.file-extensions.org/
>
> and
>
> various whois sites
>
> for domain names.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 4:31 PM, Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com> wrote:
>> On 03/12/2015 04:01 PM, Dave Taht wrote:
>>>
>>> as netperf-wrapper has grown to include far more tests than netperf,
>>> with quite a few more on their way, calling it this is increasingly
>>> less appropriate:
>>>
>>> A noted cynic wrote me privately last month, about netperf-wrapper:
>>>
>>> 'why don't you rename the friggin thing "bufferbloat" or
>>> "bloattest" or something?  Netperf-wrapper is a terrible name,
>>> seemingly still whatever the programmer called it when he wrote the
>>> first sketchy version, one step up from "foo"'
>>>
>>> Hmm...  we need a name with more foo, for sure, a better, more
>>> descriptive name. Anyone got any ideas? Maybe run a contest somewhere?
>>
>>
>> Well, not that I dislike the "netperf" name :) but I'll toss a few stripes
>> onto the bikeshed:
>>
>> *) bloat-probe
>> *) tortoise (ok, it is measuring bloat/latency not speed but still)
>> *) BMI (Bloat Measurement Index/Investigator/Illuminator ?-)
>> *) bloat-watcher
>> *) bloat-finder
>> *) bloated
>> *) blubber
>> *) Ahab
>>
>> rick
>>
>>> One (technical) hope would be to find a good file extension for the
>>> output, so it could be more easily parsed by browsers... but to heck
>>> with that... a better name?
>>>
>>> Toke had some ideas also:
>>>
>>> - NQT - http://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/NQT - I especially like
>>>    "Not Quite There". nqt.org points to this:
>>> http://dyslexiafoundation.org/nqt/
>>>
>>> - NetQual - http://www.qoesystems.com/NETQUAL.html
>>>
>>> - NQ-tester - doesn't seem to be taken by anything obvious
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bloat mailing list
>> Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
>
>
>
> --
> Dave Täht
> Let's make wifi fast, less jittery and reliable again!
>
> https://plus.google.com/u/0/107942175615993706558/posts/TVX3o84jjmb



-- 
Dave Täht
Let's make wifi fast, less jittery and reliable again!

https://plus.google.com/u/0/107942175615993706558/posts/TVX3o84jjmb

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] [Bloat] marketing #102 - giving netperf-wrapper a better name?

[Rémi Cardona]

Le 13/03/2015 00:01, Dave Taht a écrit :
> as netperf-wrapper has grown to include far more tests than netperf,
> with quite a few more on their way, calling it this is increasingly
> less appropriate:
> 
> A noted cynic wrote me privately last month, about netperf-wrapper:
> 
> 'why don't you rename the friggin thing "bufferbloat" or
> "bloattest" or something?  Netperf-wrapper is a terrible name,
> seemingly still whatever the programmer called it when he wrote the
> first sketchy version, one step up from "foo"'

Bloatalyzer ?

Cheers,

Rémi

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] [Bloat] marketing #102 - giving netperf-wrapper a better name?

[Bill Ver Steeg (versteb)]

We should call the metric "sucks-less". As in "Box A sucks less than Box B", or "Box C scored a 17 on the sucks less test".

The actual measurement would be the number of milliseconds of additional queueing delay when the system is congested, but most people will not take the time to look under the covers. Maybe the term "lags-less" would be better..

Easy to understand, and it gives the proper nudge.


Bill VerSteeg







-----Original Message-----
From: bloat-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net [mailto:bloat-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net] On Behalf Of Rémi Cardona
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2015 3:08 AM
To: bloat; cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: [Bloat] marketing #102 - giving netperf-wrapper a better name?

Le 13/03/2015 00:01, Dave Taht a écrit :
> as netperf-wrapper has grown to include far more tests than netperf, 
> with quite a few more on their way, calling it this is increasingly 
> less appropriate:
> 
> A noted cynic wrote me privately last month, about netperf-wrapper:
> 
> 'why don't you rename the friggin thing "bufferbloat" or "bloattest" 
> or something?  Netperf-wrapper is a terrible name, seemingly still 
> whatever the programmer called it when he wrote the first sketchy 
> version, one step up from "foo"'

Bloatalyzer ?

Cheers,

Rémi
_______________________________________________
Bloat mailing list
Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] [Bloat] marketing #102 - giving netperf-wrapper a better name?

[Jonathan Morton]

> On 20 Mar, 2015, at 22:08, Bill Ver Steeg (versteb) <versteb@cisco.com> wrote:
> 
> We should call the metric "sucks-less". As in "Box A sucks less than Box B", or "Box C scored a 17 on the sucks less test".

I suspect real marketing drones would get nervous at a negative-sounding name.

My idea - which I’ve floated in the past, more than once - is that the metric should be “responsiveness”, measured in Hertz.  The baseline standard would be 10Hz, corresponding to a dumb 100ms buffer.  Get down into the single-digit millisecond range, as fq_codel does, and the Responsiveness goes up above 100Hz, approaching 1000Hz.

Crucially, that’s a positive sort of term, as well as trending towards bigger numbers with actual improvements in performance, and is thus more potentially marketable.

 - Jonathan Morton

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] [Bloat] marketing #102 - giving netperf-wrapper a better name?

[Bill Ver Steeg (versteb)]

I was kidding about "sucks-less", and forgot the smiley in my initial note.

We do need a metric with an end-user-friendly name, though. Most people understand "lag", and understand that lower numbers are better. You could probably explain "lag-while-loaded" to most users (particularly people who care, like gamers) in a manner that got the point across.

Bvs


-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Morton [mailto:chromatix99@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, March 20, 2015 4:26 PM
To: Bill Ver Steeg (versteb)
Cc: Rémi Cardona; bloat; cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: [Bloat] marketing #102 - giving netperf-wrapper a better name?


> On 20 Mar, 2015, at 22:08, Bill Ver Steeg (versteb) <versteb@cisco.com> wrote:
> 
> We should call the metric "sucks-less". As in "Box A sucks less than Box B", or "Box C scored a 17 on the sucks less test".

I suspect real marketing drones would get nervous at a negative-sounding name.

My idea - which I’ve floated in the past, more than once - is that the metric should be “responsiveness”, measured in Hertz.  The baseline standard would be 10Hz, corresponding to a dumb 100ms buffer.  Get down into the single-digit millisecond range, as fq_codel does, and the Responsiveness goes up above 100Hz, approaching 1000Hz.

Crucially, that’s a positive sort of term, as well as trending towards bigger numbers with actual improvements in performance, and is thus more potentially marketable.

 - Jonathan Morton

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] [Bloat] marketing #102 - giving netperf-wrapper a better name?

[David P. Reed]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2672 bytes --]

Drag is an fluid dynamic term that suggests a meaning close to this... flow rate dependent friction.

But what you really want to suggest is a flow rate dependent *delay* that people are familiar with quantifying.

Fq_codel limits the delay as flow rate increases and is fair.

The max buffer limits delay due to Little's lemma also.

The actual delay limit in practice is what one measures in most cases. Codel is just softer than the hard limit of a small buffer.

So there are two qualitative measures - delay limit in units of milliseconds and softness or stiffness in units of milliseconds per queue depth I'd guess. Softness gives the recovery rate after a burst.

You should divide delay limit by elephant packet size in milliseconds. Based on channel rate.

I'd think the scaled delay limit should

On Mar 20, 2015, "Bill Ver Steeg (versteb)" <versteb@cisco.com> wrote:
>I was kidding about "sucks-less", and forgot the smiley in my initial
>note.
>
>We do need a metric with an end-user-friendly name, though. Most people
>understand "lag", and understand that lower numbers are better. You
>could probably explain "lag-while-loaded" to most users (particularly
>people who care, like gamers) in a manner that got the point across.
>
>Bvs
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Jonathan Morton [mailto:chromatix99@gmail.com]
>Sent: Friday, March 20, 2015 4:26 PM
>To: Bill Ver Steeg (versteb)
>Cc: Rémi Cardona; bloat; cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>Subject: Re: [Bloat] marketing #102 - giving netperf-wrapper a better
>name?
>
>
>> On 20 Mar, 2015, at 22:08, Bill Ver Steeg (versteb)
><versteb@cisco.com> wrote:
>>
>> We should call the metric "sucks-less". As in "Box A sucks less than
>Box B", or "Box C scored a 17 on the sucks less test".
>
>I suspect real marketing drones would get nervous at a
>negative-sounding name.
>
>My idea - which I’ve floated in the past, more than once - is that the
>metric should be “responsiveness”, measured in Hertz.  The baseline
>standard would be 10Hz, corresponding to a dumb 100ms buffer.  Get down
>into the single-digit millisecond range, as fq_codel does, and the
>Responsiveness goes up above 100Hz, approaching 1000Hz.
>
>Crucially, that’s a positive sort of term, as well as trending towards
>bigger numbers with actual improvements in performance, and is thus
>more potentially marketable.
>
> - Jonathan Morton
>
>_______________________________________________
>Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel

-- Sent with K-@ Mail - the evolution of emailing.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3958 bytes --]

Re: [Cerowrt-devel] [Bloat] marketing #102 - giving netperf-wrapper a better name?

[Alex Burr]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2461 bytes --]

I think we need something that's comprehensible as quickly as possible. I'm no graphic designer, but how about this:
https://imgrush.com/0oPGJ8VHluFy.png

|   |
|   |  |   |   |   |   |   |
|  |
|  |
| View on imgrush.com | Preview by Yahoo |
|  |
|   |



I used the word 'delay' as it is more familiar than latency. The number is illustrated by a picture of a physical queue; hopefully everyone can identify it instantly, and knows that a longer one is worse. The eye supposed to be drawn to the figure at the back of the queue to emphasise this.
I just made this manually in inkscape, but it should not be too hard to automate the generation of a graphic like this.
Alex 

     On Friday, March 20, 2015 9:08 PM, Bill Ver Steeg (versteb) <versteb@cisco.com> wrote:
   
 

 I was kidding about "sucks-less", and forgot the smiley in my initial note.

We do need a metric with an end-user-friendly name, though. Most people understand "lag", and understand that lower numbers are better. You could probably explain "lag-while-loaded" to most users (particularly people who care, like gamers) in a manner that got the point across.

Bvs


-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Morton [mailto:chromatix99@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, March 20, 2015 4:26 PM
To: Bill Ver Steeg (versteb)
Cc: Rémi Cardona; bloat; cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: [Bloat] marketing #102 - giving netperf-wrapper a better name?


> On 20 Mar, 2015, at 22:08, Bill Ver Steeg (versteb) <versteb@cisco.com> wrote:
> 
> We should call the metric "sucks-less". As in "Box A sucks less than Box B", or "Box C scored a 17 on the sucks less test".

I suspect real marketing drones would get nervous at a negative-sounding name.

My idea - which I’ve floated in the past, more than once - is that the metric should be “responsiveness”, measured in Hertz.  The baseline standard would be 10Hz, corresponding to a dumb 100ms buffer.  Get down into the single-digit millisecond range, as fq_codel does, and the Responsiveness goes up above 100Hz, approaching 1000Hz.

Crucially, that’s a positive sort of term, as well as trending towards bigger numbers with actual improvements in performance, and is thus more potentially marketable.

 - Jonathan Morton

_______________________________________________
Bloat mailing list
Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat


 
   

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 12887 bytes --]