From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) (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 431C421F105; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 05:42:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.mail.srv.osa [10.202.2.44]) by gateway1.nyi.mail.srv.osa (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDB0820E54; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 08:42:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from frontend1.nyi.mail.srv.osa ([10.202.2.160]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 06 Nov 2012 08:42:51 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hmh.eng.br; h=date :from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; s=mesmtp; bh=1//PqbQhedCrQIcQQJc0Aifh jKY=; b=A8qQbaof0emz7Yxp/D56h0egqVsubJYt0/DrqJfhOAs8Y/7FMLUzo3gF wNTZzC38IKpi3hYibj5i32Sxb8FwvweNFHqzAGGoYZoCCIIne8WT03IcB9x+45pv uCkvku4cIFREFPyXH68cCp6CDQ7gaaLAyv3TtYt8tdz8PdYwBPY= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; s=smtpout; bh=1//PqbQhedCrQIcQQJc0AifhjKY=; b=Cec/0BDSxx1TwNemxbV2BR4o4LVe 74YVhb3Uwq9C842spwvzmLmrKPSZ1f2K/ZIf7cEsyI+ElCsKxCn7RTiFrdv/SquT dc/vU9hp6loyoGPT+LUb8kH6Jqf9hLelC+SuaHO23WW2uQCKPXayDGdtrXmGBB82 124iqR1OHGydUb4= X-Sasl-enc: PBZjQKCUXgZjZQ2+iKqhL5COKDE4fiwZcdqbWPWJd0NG 1352209371 Received: from khazad-dum.debian.net (unknown [201.82.192.8]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 798778E04E7; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 08:42:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.khazad-dum.debian.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16DB19000235; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 11:42:50 -0200 (BRST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at khazad-dum.debian.net Received: from khazad-dum.debian.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (khazad-dum2.khazad-dum.debian.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id TSK8TK8LddEc; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 11:42:45 -0200 (BRST) Received: by khazad-dum.debian.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id D5B569000222; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 11:42:45 -0200 (BRST) Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2012 11:42:45 -0200 From: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh To: Dave Taht Message-ID: <20121106134245.GB22409@khazad-dum.debian.net> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-GPG-Fingerprint: 1024D/1CDB0FE3 5422 5C61 F6B7 06FB 7E04 3738 EE25 DE3F 1CDB 0FE3 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 06 Nov 2012 06:08:17 -0800 Cc: codel@lists.bufferbloat.net, cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net, bloat Subject: Re: [Codel] [Bloat] RFC: Realtime Response Under Load (rrul) test specification X-BeenThere: codel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: CoDel AQM discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2012 13:42:54 -0000 On Tue, 06 Nov 2012, Dave Taht wrote: > I have been working on developing a specification for testing networks > more effectively for various side effects of bufferbloat, notably > gaming and voip performance, and especially web performance.... as > well as a few other things that concerned me, such as IPv6 behavior, > and the effects of packet classification. When it is reasonably complete, it would be nice to have it as an informational or better yet, standards-track IETF RFC. IETF RFC non-experimental status allows us to require RRUL testing prior to service acceptance, and even add it as one of the SLA metrics on public tenders, which goes a long way into pushing anything into more widespread usage. -- "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh