From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail2.tohojo.dk (mail2.tohojo.dk [IPv6:2a01:4f8:200:3141::101]) (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 9C51021F1C3; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 10:01:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mail2.tohojo.dk Sender: toke@toke.dk DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=toke.dk; s=201310; t=1398790898; bh=d9oHF3VHMI89FKco8/j/JiJrinvArL1VqcDgYN0Hmsk=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To; b=NIO31E6IFBb2XSccIpIyK5gQZmUhImABN4IZ+94rP+qnUU/4hN6oDHNKHpuMGQAG3 mQGBITg/FBXL6bT4C5TKh3fUhb17wOGXoo15orsz+a0gKI9aKeGvcdNkkWCKqt0A6D lUWVz5Uo0yKcRVCZpxUWkClNI2TGoqQCvnVEYt5E= Received: by alrua-x1.borgediget.toke.dk (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A3B5120F9C; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 19:01:38 +0200 (CEST) From: =?utf-8?Q?Toke_H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= To: Jim Gettys References: <4130D000-FE28-4A5E-B824-3371C1602472@cisco.com> Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 19:01:36 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Jim Gettys's message of "Tue, 29 Apr 2014 12:44:38 -0400") Message-ID: <87bnvkkr2n.fsf@toke.dk> Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Cc: bloat , "Fred Baker \(fred\)" , "aqm@ietf.org" , "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] [aqm] [Bloat] the side effects of 330ms lag in the real world 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, 29 Apr 2014 17:01:46 -0000 --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Jim Gettys writes: > Now, if someone gives me real fiber to the home, with a real switch fabric > upstream, rather than gpon life might be somewhat better (if the switches aren't > themselves overbuffered.... But so far, it isn't. As a data point for this, I have fibre to my apartment building and ethernet into the apartment. I get .5 ms to my upstream gateway and about 6 ms to Google. Still measured up to ~20 ms of bufferbloat while running at 100 Mbps... http://files.toke.dk/bufferbloat/data/karlstad/cdf_comparison.png However, as that graph shows, it is quite possible to completely avoid bufferbloat by deploying the right shaping. And in that case fibre *does* have a significant latency advantage. The best latency I've seen to the upstream gateway on DSL has been ~12 ms. -Toke --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJTX9rwAAoJEENeEGz1+utPcDkH/iozkvZUxjqcTn34AvL7l4Vi 2fpLUwIoVJkYmJ3z49nf+7ps/quPQDIkz3nHha7krsQYQT1To9WbXvszzKSgKnBl r4AaQCJWHCCiyNs4Ncbdm0wg5jlASLlBhmpaqM7e0Nb5vfW5SbQkg7hInxNKBCs6 H2peb2Tb8nQRdyY+q/FzL1aZYmdidbTbtfqBgrmO2KSE9+883upD3ouFzXmV7vRm 2QoDpl9R1ZksBAGfDkBaqOz83aSBAr4UFvV045wY16nvtP06QGjYVE+6R35Fl1lR 2uFjdZpyY3oH6LjgOTpZQH9toFrlFXGLvzGEdaI345VonOHPRtsLpWMgU3aLrBY= =w0Hb -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--