From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pg1-x530.google.com (mail-pg1-x530.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::530]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 24E853B2A4 for ; Sat, 12 Nov 2022 09:38:49 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-pg1-x530.google.com with SMTP id f3so179733pgc.2 for ; Sat, 12 Nov 2022 06:38:49 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=cc:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=ive1HgSjVEVnMWCO1XjrmP7P0VYJWoguEoFIlqasTmM=; b=DoJPs0FgPVa+ugb0mKXm280fUSUpN1Ksi+vKtCwivwrCiEulG/zLJb9LRtfjPgseeL rMXhm9weFl1EKTb4uGoOzH8yyNi+3oapdGDldKdPd0gELB5hYdGrmeoj8EncIPF9nZbB THdUmOAXvLn029bxUfRZfNOtfFkHxSUVUr/6SNLrRWYYILH+OMIDNHIiPkGnuWcLKyb6 76qJRILkcPLhUkJ8hwN4n3T7AgCs+oQFnkQZFlFIWIJFMbipC5NWcfyPbIE3mx7drPYP 4Do+7jQMXbOQ0RoDiUarM2cQpNSBe1FGxmM0QXoX0uGAkAH3YM3qfeFktLIV2Ka4TeEf +s8g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=ive1HgSjVEVnMWCO1XjrmP7P0VYJWoguEoFIlqasTmM=; b=fcwyHe+80gNIoc66x6j3p6k9Hih+LhIZ4ap3F8mGmm+cG9eA/lkCHNL9w8RviXNzCC FWj3eDqSxmdKVKozxBvUPaYAdLUMajvdcpoU2OGOgm6I2yoFzQFa9a41JSmG76UrKCDY r/TCWtdJ2eBlyk+rvBt9ogDfM4j27CxxqViQo37g/trOX5K+A0dpTX040NanpfVQfWZd f9nPY6ufQa6dVC6KMyF/TF1zIpLRAH97v1dR2diZsOEV0OSJ2UhZvy/P7YQk5lhHcjCQ 32zSMJmHi7sRCqPC0tbaLvG5B8L9SvYgtcUCjLifSKUFM02FYz8Pu3Oels3UziRB1b9z xj2A== X-Gm-Message-State: ANoB5pmsVwjtznbrPF/MhjY07AbLZb3DdDNss8fhr//0W+fH45Uje5c0 QySx9ZpYkCymCwpLch3mxX7zkZH+LylD6EoZOe3cS/xiis8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA0mqf7ifDCsAJDPTzhldhU/ZUKzIyHCyR/h7oADNifCEGU1sCZ6AaedRXUvv9eGunmG+8GvsmttPwlUXpCb6JGPqv0= X-Received: by 2002:a63:cf4f:0:b0:470:537b:9d23 with SMTP id b15-20020a63cf4f000000b00470537b9d23mr5416764pgj.185.1668263927679; Sat, 12 Nov 2022 06:38:47 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Herbert Wolverson Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2022 08:38:37 -0600 Message-ID: Cc: libreqos Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000cd162b05ed46f6e7" Subject: Re: [LibreQoS] [Bloat] summarizing the bitag latency report? X-BeenThere: libreqos@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Many ISPs need the kinds of quality shaping cake can do List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2022 14:38:49 -0000 --000000000000cd162b05ed46f6e7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > If I had more time, I would have written a short letter - Blaise Pascal >> It's not a big truck. It's a series of tubes. And if you don't understand, those tubes can be filled and if they are filled, when you put your message in, it gets in line and it's going to be delayed by anyone that puts into that tube enormous amounts of material, enormous amounts of material. - Sen Ted R. Stevens Summarizing is tough. As Sebastian pointed out, you almost need a summary per target audience. Those two quotes highlight the problem: to the domain expert, it's almost impossible to summarize an issue because you'll be jumped on by other domain experts - and, knowing all about the issue, it feels dangerous to omit the details. Conversely, if an expert briefs some Senate aides - who i= n turn brief a non-technical senator - you can end up with a widely mocked speech. If you tone down the mockery, it's not hard to see how Sen. Stevens came to his wording - pipes, capacity, delays, queues; it does start to sound like a series of tubes. One of my coworkers likens it to the water system: The city has plenty of water, with big pipes and good pressure going to everyone's house. Your house's feed to the water main limits how much water you can get at one time - that's your download speed. Plumbing design, pipe and valve quality all affect the delay between turning your faucet on and nice cold water coming out. That's your latency. You need to optimize both. I tend to find that customers like car analogies: On a perfect racetrack, a Ferrari will reach the end before a Honda Civic. The Ferrari has more power, and is designed for faster speeds. On a public road network, the Ferrari still outpaces the Civic on fast, open roads - but it only takes one traffic jam, one poorly designed intersection or stoplight - for both vehicles to be seriously delayed. Ferrari's have a very high speed (your download speed), and multi-lane highways have great capacity (high speed networks) - but a single congested traffic ramp (a buffer between connections) can ruin the overall travel experience by adding long delays (latency) while cars merge onto different roads. Quality of Experience optimizes the buffers between roads, providing a smoother experience overall. (Both could be shortened, but analogy is frequently the way to reach non-technical users) On Sat, Nov 12, 2022 at 7:15 AM Sebastian Moeller via LibreQoS < libreqos@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote: > Hi Dave, > > > so I think you have three audiences that should learn about this: > a) end-users (my hot-take was tailored for end-users) > b) politicians > c) industry people (C-suite members of ISPs*) > > > I think you need three different one paragraph summaries tailored to each > groups focus. > > > a) end users > I would stress the "you can improve your link today with little work" to > make it fit for video conferencing "under working conditions". > I would not wade into the swamp that is "gaming" any deeper than necessar= y > (so have a sentence along the lines of "these described methods will > obviously also help other > latency-sensitive applications like gaming"). Why avoid gaming? Gamers ar= e > quite opinionated and take promises often literally, hence are easy to > disappoint so better under-promise, but over-deliver. > > b) politicians > Here I would emphasize that while fiber-to-everyone is the ultimate goal > getting latency under control will result in a noticeable "better" (becau= se > subjectively more responsive) internet experience for those that will hav= e > to wait longer for fiber. I simply assume that fiber-everywhere is the go= al > across the aisle in the US, at least over here all major parties agree > about the ultimate goal and just disagree how to get there, with the part= y > in opposition magically always seeing more urgency ;). > So push this as a relative low-effort/low-cost method to noticeably > improve the internet experience for the electorate... > > c) industry people > This has two groups, those that run large internal networks and ISPs. I > think for the first group the arguments for a) and b) could be re-used (b= ) > reframed as low-cost ways to get more mileage out of the existing network > infrastructure with a few targeted replacements/upgrades/configuration > changes). > For the second group I am a bit at a loss, as the arguments a) and b) > MIGHT not be all that attractive for someone selling internet-access pric= ed > by "top-speed", making lower speeds more enjoyable/usable seems a bit > counter productive... One pitch could be a marketable advantage over the > competition, but that requires actual competition. > Not sure how to give the enlightened ones arguments to convince their > peers. > > Regards > Sebastian > > > > *) some are enlightened already > > > P.S.: QoS, vs QoE > Cause and effect, means and end... What the users will evaluate are their > experiences; traditional QoS can be a means to improve that experience, > with a hitherto often neglected aspect being latency-under-load which abo= ve > a bare minimum access rate seems to correlate stronger with user experien= ce > than top-speeds. > > To convince CFO, or congresscritters I would think the best would be a > simple mobile demonstration platform... together with argument b) above > > > > On Nov 12, 2022, at 00:16, Dave Taht via Bloat < > bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote: > > > > If you were to try to summarize this *in a paragraph*, what would you > say? > > > > https://www.bitag.org/documents/BITAG_latency_explained.pdf > > > > (yes, I helped write this, but squeezing it down to less than 3 pages > > is beyond my capabilities, much less a paragraph, and by the time we > > hit the recommendations section, things had got too political to make > > sane recommendations) > > > > Also QoS, vs QoE. Try to imagine explaining the need to a CFO, or > > congresscritter. Feel free to take more than a paragraph. > > > > > > -- > > This song goes out to all the folk that thought Stadia would work: > > > https://www.linkedin.com/posts/dtaht_the-mushroom-song-activity-698136666= 5607352320-FXtz > > Dave T=C3=A4ht CEO, TekLibre, LLC > > _______________________________________________ > > Bloat mailing list > > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net > > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat > > _______________________________________________ > LibreQoS mailing list > LibreQoS@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/libreqos > --000000000000cd162b05ed46f6e7 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> If I had more time, I would have written a short= letter - Blaise Pascal

>>=C2=A0 It= 9;s not a big truck. It's a series of tubes. And if you don't understand, those tubes c= an be filled and if they are filled, when you put your message in, it gets in line and it's going to be delayed by anyone that puts into that tube= =20 enormous amounts of material, enormous amounts of material. -= Sen Ted R. Stevens

Summarizing is tough. As S= ebastian pointed out, you almost need a summary per
target audien= ce. Those two quotes highlight the problem: to the domain expert,
it's almost impossible to summarize an issue because you'll be jum= ped on by
other domain experts - and, knowing all about the issue= , it feels dangerous to
omit the details. Conversely, if an exper= t briefs some Senate aides - who in
turn brief a non-technical se= nator - you can end up with a widely mocked speech.
If you tone d= own the mockery, it's not hard to see how Sen. Stevens came
t= o his wording - pipes, capacity, delays, queues; it does start to sound lik= e a
series of tubes.

One of my coworkers= likens it to the water system:

The city has plent= y of water, with big pipes and good pressure going to
everyone= 9;s house. Your house's feed to the water main limits how much
water you can get at one time - that's your download speed. Plumbing<= /div>
design, pipe and valve quality all affect the delay between turni= ng your
faucet on and nice cold water coming out. That's your= latency. You need
to optimize both.

I t= end to find that customers like car analogies:

On = a perfect racetrack, a Ferrari will reach the end before a Honda Civic.
The Ferrari has more power, and is designed for faster speeds. On a<= /div>
public road network, the Ferrari still outpaces the Civic on fast= , open roads -
but it only takes one traffic jam, one poorly desi= gned intersection or
stoplight - for both vehicles to be seriousl= y delayed. Ferrari's have a
very high speed (your download sp= eed), and multi-lane highways have
great capacity (high spee= d networks) - but a single congested traffic
ramp (a buffer betwe= en connections) can ruin the overall travel experience
by adding = long delays (latency) while cars merge onto different roads.
Qual= ity of Experience optimizes the buffers between roads, providing
= a smoother experience overall.

(Both could be shor= tened, but analogy is frequently the way to reach
non-technical u= sers)



On Sat, Nov 12, 2022 at 7:15 A= M Sebastian Moeller via LibreQoS <libreqos@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
Hi Dave,


so I think you have three audiences that should learn about this:
a) end-users (my hot-take was tailored for end-users)
b) politicians
c) industry people (C-suite members of ISPs*)


I think you need three different one paragraph summaries tailored to each g= roups focus.


a) end users=C2=A0
I would stress the "you can improve your link today with little work&q= uot; to make it fit for video conferencing "under working conditions&q= uot;.
I would not wade into the swamp that is "gaming" any deeper than = necessary (so have a sentence along the lines of "these described meth= ods will obviously also help other
latency-sensitive applications like gaming"). Why avoid gaming? Gamers= are quite opinionated and take promises often literally, hence are easy to= disappoint so better under-promise, but over-deliver.

b) politicians
Here I would emphasize that while fiber-to-everyone is the ultimate goal ge= tting latency under control will result in a noticeable "better" = (because subjectively more responsive) internet experience for those that w= ill have to wait longer for fiber. I simply assume that fiber-everywhere is= the goal across the aisle in the US, at least over here all major parties = agree about the ultimate goal and just disagree how to get there, with the = party in opposition magically always seeing more urgency ;).
So push this as a relative low-effort/low-cost method to noticeably improve= the internet experience for the electorate...

c) industry people
This has two groups, those that run large internal networks and ISPs. I thi= nk for the first group the arguments for a) and b) could be re-used (b) ref= ramed as low-cost ways to get more mileage out of the existing network infr= astructure with a few targeted replacements/upgrades/configuration changes)= .
For the second group I am a bit at a loss, as the arguments a) and b) MIGHT= not be all that attractive for someone selling internet-access priced by &= quot;top-speed", making lower speeds more enjoyable/usable seems a bit= counter productive... One pitch could be a=C2=A0 marketable advantage over= the competition, but that requires actual competition.
Not sure how to give the enlightened ones arguments to convince their peers= .

Regards
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Sebastian



*) some are enlightened already


P.S.: QoS, vs QoE
Cause and effect, means and end... What the users will evaluate are their e= xperiences; traditional QoS can be a means to improve that experience, with= a hitherto often neglected aspect being latency-under-load which above a b= are minimum access rate seems to correlate stronger with user experience th= an top-speeds.

To convince CFO, or congresscritters I would think the best would be a simp= le mobile demonstration platform... together with argument b) above


> On Nov 12, 2022, at 00:16, Dave Taht via Bloat <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
>
> If you were to try to summarize this *in a paragraph*, what would you = say?
>
> https://www.bitag.org/documents/BITA= G_latency_explained.pdf
>
> (yes, I helped write this, but squeezing it down to less than 3 pages<= br> > is beyond my capabilities, much less a paragraph, and by the time we > hit the recommendations section, things had got too political to make<= br> > sane recommendations)
>
> Also QoS, vs QoE. Try to imagine explaining the need to a CFO, or
> congresscritter. Feel free to take more than a paragraph.
>
>
> --
> This song goes out to all the folk that thought Stadia would work:
> https:/= /www.linkedin.com/posts/dtaht_the-mushroom-song-activity-698136666560735232= 0-FXtz
> Dave T=C3=A4ht CEO, TekLibre, LLC
> _______________________________________________
> Bloat mailing list
> Bloat= @lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
_______________________________________________
LibreQoS mailing list
LibreQo= S@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/libreqos
--000000000000cd162b05ed46f6e7--