From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 920B53CB38; Mon, 5 Jul 2021 17:21:24 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1625520082; bh=hS4z7q83YNzln0yLMsSnQKyKGghXTQNiyZ223/+qWM0=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=kAefxIXAuXU2j43KYdfHO4PCE8M/msL4GHOPXLSHTgVcb7f/Obk/KCjadbYj5fTHU p46PGP0fTkSgKGvpXYIP2E62tAS1N9MfdvyHvkE+0MAtwG+AacyFOUS68L6i6aBuqN sBEafDvbwyA0I+qbEaeFfT0Qa+vf/Vapaer7dxWw= X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c Received: from [192.168.42.229] ([77.8.100.155]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx105 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1N4Qwg-1l1UrU2xT4-011Vgn; Mon, 05 Jul 2021 23:21:22 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.21\)) From: Sebastian Moeller In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2021 23:21:21 +0200 Cc: bloat , cerowrt-devel Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: To: =?utf-8?Q?Dave_T=C3=A4ht?= X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.21) X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:/xrnrICni20i4pI6Pe2OSzMUH9r9s2xQbotmI6b0oZ1Ojg14C6g P64nc3vwgS0RjQFGNwrlWkRqHzXpJZKfkbbD32jMy8npiEq1zf+7ZIpDBF1N7HY6HFTRA4b D3CV8SPweFL5bw02nz4Lj7mBJxFHVLIP7AQdOMoRJttkkLJ6UxX2nuKlYHxWp66leFKnEG9 JIwZyb/9/Vl9sIkXaLryw== X-Spam-Flag: NO X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:VubgC3WJXyc=:fvFddT6rxh75LzkBLyQ3V5 CjEwnXmA6zBp1KjoHpiVHJTYTQP+rrP3m1g40C04M9oDInceLD+fT6BYEfi9XL5lnT3sFBLC+ NokvWf8TO0EmIYJAS2yqVz+BYQl4XVW5wp07gizn2AuCDDBAm7R94dKzF7MdAIHifIJwAfn20 cVqQebQhuXCEz6YZ7u0JBWDZfMCorRlQUZAtc7w6ml+Fn4hRkrgJUWCC1y1AQNYzQHqPN9G6Z 88SSmIoaoUaD4JAnfc8hsWb64s/1fhhJAPkwoMF9IjH2g2Dx3zRgZFl3ZTJE1u+9Nr/tGVzxA fxLfmSUh/N47ykOxOXwKNpOH9O1hGWjeFMWybICGv5vOG1rAI3vWbd/SkWKQe1dUbJiSC3fS0 1vpa/jpiCijhsT0iwexNqFUzQEDl91xYYYwtCXp+uvy066n5dGo4+rKeTigqJOfvHGVza7psm nkcQ7qe146kKfTVOICcI1qFN/s2r6cwd3TO/MzFHImewMW9tOf7AUidox912/2t63jM2r6TzD qIDvX39jiyZAv6ysKnuafDW9KVvq2sxxcDFbYtgWziIUS+787ikJuCqmHL4D7BJWSNj/snw88 yZ4ZtijQgyU4ElaKcuAofQV2Lt8g8aiA2r+CEWrNiYyHUmLlpc0KMPcBrs0l78uwc18/S2laZ lmf3oNX5IcBvx5GbARMNzR1A5zMf3T43uotNgz/DP12c+t300qGJVYRKZv76Kar7OEUKcCMSe WRyGFHBkbSBY9Fq4u2fV4tGKWj4FVVMbTJkouoEH5DT6DoStz9pCBxyHe8WLFiPDvhWtfMf6I vDuXSNRRp7M7kbf8tkTNKlGou0Vhy5mUf0lcCtYbiZhCEw8eYrht8x3J7HIo/HTX6gSwcmMqZ TipMFCfRFIPoBvVLLPk3i25HsKubnl1HPrggAa3xNr5KCiI/KWpLkYOeH0IjvOQfqrumdc8E0 ko8ZfwMVYdm75uiLgtJtDDbU+V6J5H9cszTJOX/S/KnpVVEo8YCDBusKb2/VQOfXYKUwtvXQl 9JT8zq4ADKu3fYzpokSAJ7SPJUCNEyr4iNQHk1URUfDgN1WQNZl8470nkLSdUdo3CW/tMHV9Y 5tssnxwSPQZOgkys4q4haGaf9+Du7guKsks Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] the future is in high speed symmetrical internet speeds!!!! X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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: Mon, 05 Jul 2021 21:21:24 -0000 Hi Dave, Well, less asymmetric down/up ratios are certainly worth fighting for = (for one NTP should work better). And, as I might add, something that is = orthogonal to better router software ;) a fast symmetric link with a = craptastic router is still roughly as much fun as a dial-up connection = with the best router software we can wish for... ;) Regarding that EFF article, while I think that light over fiber is "the = obvious way forward", I fear that the strategy of asking for 100/100 = under the assumption, it can only be reliably achieved by fiber roll = out, ignores the full duplex technologies that are either ready for = deployment (full duplex g.fast) or a much cheaper plant upgrade away = than rolling our new fiber (full duplex docsis comes to mind, which = might require changes to the physical plant layout with = nested/hierarchical amplifiers*). I note that local docsis ISPs in = Germany are aiming for 100 Mbps upload in the next 12-24 months (simply = by switching more upload spectrum to docsis 3.1 coding schemes). In = short 100/100 might not be the "only with fiber" speed grade the authors = seem to think, and if the goal is full fiber than it seems best to = actually require full fiber. Best Regards Sebastian *) Or not might be possible to run full duplex over some level of = hierarchical amplifiers... > On Jul 5, 2021, at 20:46, Dave Taht wrote: >=20 > or at least, in more politicking, for fiber. >=20 > = https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/07/future-symmetrical-high-speed-intern= et-speeds >=20 > I emailed the authors and mentioned that better routers might be a > cheaper start... >=20 > --=20 > Latest Podcast: > = https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6791014284936785920/ >=20 > Dave T=C3=A4ht CTO, TekLibre, LLC > _______________________________________________ > Cerowrt-devel mailing list > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel