Re: [Ecn-sane] [tsvwg] per-flow scheduling

["Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@toke.dk>]

"David P. Reed" <dpreed@deepplum.com> writes:

> It's even worse. The FCC got focused on max speeds back in the day as
> its only way to think about Internet Access service. And I was serving
> on the FCC Technological Advisory Committee and also in its Spectrum
> Policy Task Force, then later involved in the rather confused
> discussions of Network Neutrality, where again "speed" in the "up-to"
> sense was the sole framing of the discussion.
>  
> Because it was mostly lawyers and lobbyists (not network engineers),
> this focus on max speed as the sole measure of quality ended up with a
> huge distortion of the discussion, strongly encouraged by the
> lobbyists who love confusion.
>  
> That said, max speed plays a role at all time scales in minimizing
> response time, but queuing delay has no constituency, even though its
> impact is FAR worse in real situations.
>  
> If the FCC and regulators (or even the DoD communications management
> layers) ever start talking about queueing delay in shared network
> services, I will die of shock.
>  
> But we did have one HUGE temporary success. The speed test at DSL
> Reports measures lag under load, and calls it bufferbloat, and gives a
> reasonably scaled score.

The Netflix test at fast.com does as well now (although it's under the
"more info" button, so not as visible by default).

-Toke