From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <redag2@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-wi0-x236.google.com (mail-wi0-x236.google.com
	[IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::236])
	(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 854C721F4FE
	for <cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net>;
	Sat, 24 May 2014 07:13:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wi0-f182.google.com with SMTP id r20so2207043wiv.3
	for <cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net>;
	Sat, 24 May 2014 07:13:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type;
	bh=tCEoC8sMMxNVEWebsaKhJu9Ad6vunL0lKj4OQ+jG/AE=;
	b=w6yDhzaKfe32cXXPOerSSpfTZpddl+WIjJUagpveQnMj6nOCPZQuNhP9spwKaFo2rZ
	XjuRQ1Dvvt6ZdtJ9+2vg4Lgiimckr0WbV5FyS4jZH18rKbqbqHCPyYGfWnZv8W3t5X82
	Eq7O2UaeB2LgOlJ/ZRC1Y4DxecalKh8OUi3d5UxlV4c2qCznvSoCPQqrIb4ijCWN1G8b
	Y9grB7ktkUQqNEVrDecbY/AmPAthieYC7r9XrznxAOPqD5Lm1/x0rSbUckBhq78QOett
	iR02GilY9NUD8nUrcEklp7TW0II0pUKgnheLvNbyitzTJ2z+WxwLOOQ4Z5LYiXDT6I2C
	4tSw==
X-Received: by 10.180.97.10 with SMTP id dw10mr11616355wib.38.1400940796547;
	Sat, 24 May 2014 07:13:16 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.217.55.1 with HTTP; Sat, 24 May 2014 07:12:56 -0700 (PDT)
From: "R." <redag2@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 24 May 2014 10:12:56 -0400
Message-ID: <CACj-SW2ptcx9RaHmRd=uYFJEDtU-GboBimP-qY+3ALFd14Wq3A@mail.gmail.com>
To: cerowrt-devel <cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] Ideas on how to simplify and popularize
 bufferbloat control for consideration.
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>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 24 May 2014 14:13:19 -0000

>> I should point out that another issue with deploying fq_codel widely is that it requires an accurate measurement (currently) of the providers bandwidth.

Pardon my noobiness, but is there a technical obstacle that prevents
the creation of a user-triggered function on the router side that
measures the provider's bandwidth?

Function, when (luci-gui?) triggered, would:

1. Ensure that internet connectivity is present.
2. Disconnect all clients.
3. Engage in DL and UL on a dedicated web server, measure stats and
straight up use them in fq_codel -- or suggest them in appropriate
QoS-gui user-boxes.

Further, this function could be auto-scheduled or made enabled on
router boot up.

I must be missing something important which prevents this. What is it?