From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.toke.dk (mail.toke.dk [IPv6:2a00:7660:6da:2001::664]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E08963B29E for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 03:49:41 -0400 (EDT) From: Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=20161023; t=1561708179; bh=xNvHpBwpY//NucVeHzXL6LqqvWw7Q/Lej38lLInh31A=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=KECZ+VXWieKtvA1FMfetItDQZ++RQynqAhlPIhwUxX9pdh5EZf7OAVhVeavsfE4/Q p7ePBr0qIOhJbaqlDlPHQ/ZpoCqs3GbhNtFP1CW+vrY+Rfm96HPeQpG/LWkbY9JXD9 swuMVo79OUNf+l4WfCwoF/VbYRh6BHlV9KjHWSa/BdfjxiqP8z12yKUEzmRBc0Xu7+ IeRV32XsZcDpxqCbw35qwGdaiHkWi9ywgEdLU06Fy9JOhMF/i9Fx8duWXsv1CTo8PB ZlWSfxZ2Omb626SKE/9nf1M9R6dBZEUW3ugqs04esrok8Mfd6H1cyuPBLPlJtai5Yz LsVn4ECSSf8Yg== To: "David P. Reed" , Brian E Carpenter Cc: "ecn-sane\@lists.bufferbloat.net" , tsvwg IETF list In-Reply-To: <1561671061.42671176@apps.rackspace.com> References: <350f8dd5-65d4-d2f3-4d65-784c0379f58c@bobbriscoe.net> <46D1ABD8-715D-44D2-B7A0-12FE2A9263FE@gmx.de> <835b1fb3-e8d5-c58c-e2f8-03d2b886af38@gmail.com> <1561233009.95886420@apps.rackspace.com> <71EF351D-AFBF-4C92-B6B9-7FD695B68815@gmail.com> <1561241377.4026977@apps.rackspace.com> <4E863FC5-D30E-4F76-BDF7-6A787958C628@gmx.de> <1561566706.778820831@apps.rackspace.com> <9A6E126A-43A3-4BD8-A3AC-507FF9095470@gmx.de> <2382048d-25de-df7e-f787-8ab0d606d3dc@gmail.com> <1561671061.42671176@apps.rackspace.com> Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 09:49:39 +0200 X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Message-ID: <87v9wq87zg.fsf@toke.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Subject: Re: [Ecn-sane] [tsvwg] per-flow scheduling X-BeenThere: ecn-sane@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of explicit congestion notification's impact on the Internet List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 07:49:42 -0000 "David P. Reed" 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