From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm1-x335.google.com (mail-wm1-x335.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::335]) (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 374193B2A4 for ; Sat, 12 Nov 2022 14:31:16 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-wm1-x335.google.com with SMTP id c3-20020a1c3503000000b003bd21e3dd7aso7760297wma.1 for ; Sat, 12 Nov 2022 11:31:16 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=SVIGBWbaGafoYkSSKBjHaZtFfCG6RvYc197JoWNPK5Y=; b=IV9ROA0QvoKeaEw6NhFR7/JqWkeTritM+c5EnwLKxs0jjsvytbQhWklhKAXXcR7A+J snqmW7H9t/zGIq0JoYHSa64yRIw52pEbFMCwuXB4xmDZX6eVoMLQX26yTTxbxB2pVbx3 fyYd7RL9JqfHg/Xse1WTkHZw+cHuEJETtUkiFEQGc3ZucUnngiUgAjqBb/owftmcWoMo ZZ/zjWmmn8sYcEc/QpULnZgOKgRbk3NUvvxXtBCfzjE1JYDNHy7oxkm4/ycncM23JK/z gd15nmVIIYgtqA5+fiaqejy4gMXSHBCPx7Hh34YOOfT2kh1wRPFzG5QkCIhirmoyU+H2 smEA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to: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=SVIGBWbaGafoYkSSKBjHaZtFfCG6RvYc197JoWNPK5Y=; b=Upo1RT4mR07TWs1d7TAW/E3aaVMFQg48zN1pmThSMLA3w0TXKAiJytMPfs1sS+HFyX Nh7dRtb/VCwhg71/CWHGLBn9e3dzMoLkTqbVFV1neuJ2X7gQAfjLDzf819oUjBLw2RP+ WJ5cUbZTXtY2+rrRRRrCdcoHl8yxEALpM+5JZc8XLMET9GIj16w9jn5PSX2rvtLZwL6K LH1jJR4oeb+orQNnze+PWqa1D/xtGneTTab2ktB3U6fDm/buxY15u1KQWvm/eTHiPzxI 3K8q09+HPw0szyJGTZZ9mgvwxilELEhbLbPmi1ykPXnYBRLf24yUX39nn2NmBAE+dSDb Un0A== X-Gm-Message-State: ANoB5pl9yscfesHVv0nshfBbQj0SBFxU85nmouYqU0my0S3yfxkWtbWm mTgXZdLZC7DfekcJV5XmTfQQusUJtA9U92H6WpY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA0mqf6DPgxm5LcJPiI24x6FY1Zada1h34RqLaNGugMv64u0IQhmDEwleBttAcsgauTgUhhdtKm/eSHxeQg8CPLSKV0= X-Received: by 2002:a7b:c409:0:b0:3c6:c796:1071 with SMTP id k9-20020a7bc409000000b003c6c7961071mr4556299wmi.138.1668281474607; Sat, 12 Nov 2022 11:31:14 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <938D9D45-DADA-4291-BD8A-84E4257CEE49@apple.com> In-Reply-To: From: Dave Taht Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2022 11:30:58 -0800 Message-ID: To: dan Cc: Herbert Wolverson , libreqos , Sascha Meinrath Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [LibreQoS] Various aspects of net neutrality 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 19:31:16 -0000 Changing the subject line. This is a very nuanced topic and I would rather enjoy the day AFK! To stir the pot, tho: I have had a cable industry insider claim that fq_codel violated the california code you cite. Wrote about it here: https://blog.cerowrt.org/post/net_neutrality_customers/ And taking on the other side: https://blog.cerowrt.org/post/net_neutrality_isps/ I have asked multiple lawyers about it since, and the rules need to be clarified, here. The level of doublethink in the cable/telco industry about NN has to be experienced to be believed. Just spent 6 years losing a fight about it on l4s and related, so now they can hide behind the IETFs skirts now. I didn't make friends with any side that way, and of my relationship from that period, with the eff and the ACLU, I don't know... but I did write a nice piece of rhetoric: "fq codel (now IETF standard RFC8290) is a uniquely =E2=80=9CAmerican=E2=80= =9D algorithm. It gives the =E2=80=9Clittle guy=E2=80=9D - the little packet, t= he first packets in a new connection to anywhere, a little boost until the flow achieves parity with other flows from other sources, with minimal buffering. This means that all network traffic gets treated equally - faster. Isn=E2=80=99t that what you want in a network neutral framework? DN= S, gaming traffic, voip, videoconferencing, and the first packets of any new flow, to anywhere, get a small boost. That=E2=80=99s it. Big flows - fr= om anybody - from netflix to google to comcast - all achieve parity, with minimal delay and buffering, at a wide variety of real round trip times." Just to throw another bit of controversial thought before I gaily depart for a nice lunch... I tended to support WISPA's non-defense of NN in multiple respects. Title II, and additional regulation seemed worse, then, than having some mildly chastized ISPs remain free to do whatever they wanted. With my brutal experiences with politics starting with the clipper chip, the CDA, SOPA, network neutrality, and of late the NTIA broadband funds act.... My basic conclusion was this: There must be a middle path, and it starts with less lawyers being in charge at the FCC and extends to, in general, less politicians on any side of the debate, making policy and slogans that don't line up with reality. "For a successful technology .... " - richard feynman. On Sat, Nov 12, 2022 at 9:39 AM dan via LibreQoS wrote: > > I have to argue with you on 'equally limited' streaming being ok. That a= llows for 'internet-like' service but no/poor streaming, a service that cla= mps down really hard on streaming and then offers you an upgrade to make it= work. Neutrality doesn't mean 'kind of' neutral. If it's called 'Interne= t' then no specific service or even type of service should be limited for t= he provider's direct benefit or whims. I can see no positive case for a pr= ovider limiting any service/type below the customers quoted service. The p= rovider gets to save money, but since they offer an inferior product that i= s essentially false advertised and customers have no way to know this then = capitalist tools like consumer choice can't work. Consumers don't know the= y can get a better suited service, they don't show demand in a market, that= prevents competition from having an opportunity, etc. Most people have j= ust 1 fast internet option. > > Does a customer that can't figure out why their new Roku 4K on their new = 4K TV refuses to stream 4K Netflix on their 100M internet service say "Netf= lix sucks!". or Roku sucks or Sony sucks or whatever? So this spills over= into making other services take the blame for bad connections. > > > > > On Sat, Nov 12, 2022 at 10:19 AM Herbert Wolverson via LibreQoS wrote: >> >> Net neutrality is complex (I'm generally in favor of the concept). There= 's nothing stopping an ISP from having rules that video streaming be limite= d - but ALL video streaming has to be equally limited. So ComCast could use= Sandvine, but only without any vendor-specific limitations. Same for Cambi= um. Limit streams that look like video, and you're fine. With that said, it= runs into something I say a lot: don't penalize your customers for using y= our product. If you're buying a 100mbit/s pipe, hooking it to your fancy 4k= streaming system - it's entirely reasonable to expect sharp 4k video. In f= act, your shaping emphasis should be on keeping their video nice and watcha= ble even though someone just decided to download the newest Call of Duty, u= pdate their xbox, and update the firmware on their smart fridge. Likewise, = if someone really wants the smallest 5 mbit connection you once offered - b= ecause they only ever use it to check email (we actually had a customer com= plain when we offered them a free upgrade from a 5mbit/s plan, years ago!) = - you want to do your best to make it a usable tiny plan for them. Fair que= uing (along with a bit of user education; we eventually convinced the custo= mer that "no change in fees" actually meant not charging them more money) h= elps with all of that. >> >> It can win customers, too. We have a couple of business customers who sw= itched us from their backup to their primary because "our service felt snap= pier". We had a business go with us because their 24x7 lobby streaming vide= o looked better on our (smaller) connection, and a couple of fraternities w= ho likewise decided to use us because their overkill 4k video setup looked = better (even with the 20+ Xboxes we could see on their network). >> >> QUIC makes me chuckle, because it's exactly what we were doing in gamede= v land in the late 90s to make deathmatches run smoothly. (Seriously, Quake= World and the original Unreal Tournament had the most amazing network code;= they basically implemented what is now known as "reliable UDP" to incredib= le results). >> >> With that said, I think we've got a remarkable amount of wiggle-room to = make things better (and it's not at all shoddy right now!). XDP is amazing = as-is, and is improving fast. (I'm currently reading https://github.com/ile= jn/xdpbridge - an older project that doesn't seem to have gained much tract= ion, but I'm wondering if it couldn't provide some seriously fast bridge of= floading; I'll have to setup a better test environment to find out) >> >> On Sat, Nov 12, 2022 at 10:09 AM Robert Chac=C3=B3n via LibreQoS wrote: >>> >>> Thank you, Dan. >>> I completely agree with you 100% there. It's a risky way to save a tiny= amount of money on bandwidth costs. >>> Comcast paid out $16 million in a settlement over using Sandvine's DPI = in this way. >>> Since then, Comcast has switched from DPI to fair queueing with DOCSIS-= pie. >>> >>> California's SB-822 will be used as a template by many other states goi= ng forward on Net Neutrality. >>> SB-822 even clarified that "Reasonable Network Management" needs to be = "as application-agnostic as possible". >>> These DPI approaches like Cambium's will not hold up in court the way F= air Queuing (Preseem, LibreQoS) based solutions will. >>> We can point to years of public research and RFCs when defending a Fair= Queuing QoE approach. >>> They can't so easily defend using a product that advertised its big "sc= ale down 4k to save money" knob or "accelerate their speeds only when they = run speed tests" button. >>> It's concerning to me that these QoE vendors are not disclosing "hey, d= on't use this in NN states like California please". >>> The WISP industry will be hurt long-term by these products with consume= rs viewing us as an inferior technology that limits their usage in intrusiv= e ways. >>> Like you said, let's let them use their plan however they want. It does= n't hurt us. But things like capping end-users at HD will hurt us long-term= in lost sales. >>> >>> Regarding TCP acceleration, I'm leaning toward the argument made by Dan= from Preseem that QUIC adoption is growing pretty quickly and we may not w= ant to mess with TCP at the expense of UDP given the rise of QUIC. >>> Cloudlfare says HTTP/3 and QUIC are already at 28% and growing. >>> One point he brought up is that if we use TCP acceleration, and a middl= ebox has to be rebooted or something - all client TCP sessions will break w= hen OSPF switches paths around the box. >>> >>> On Sat, Nov 12, 2022 at 8:36 AM dan via LibreQoS wrote: >>>> >>>> I think there's a thin grey line between what other vendors (paraqum, = bequant/cambium) and libreQoS is trying to do. The first two are REALLY pu= shing this selecting narrowing of traffic and they'll go straight after str= eaming for their demos. Most people that drop in the cambium QoE appliance= turn the knobs on Netflix down and then praise the 40% savings on their ne= twork. Same with PQ. I think this is fundamentally wrong. This is the e= ntire reason Net Neutrality keeps popping up. Why does the ISP get to say = "You only need 25Mbps for your netflix". That's double wrong if they offer= their own video services. It's not about improving the customer's experie= nce, it's about spending less on upstream bandwidth at the customer's expen= se. As soon as they say 'pays for itself in bandwidth savings' you know wh= at the product is primarily for. >>>> >>>> This is why I like the preseem and libreqos model of just using a 'sto= ck' cake and just finessing the data coming in to keep the pipe from cloggi= ng. Who cares if someone pulls 90M bursts of apple TV+ on their 100M pipe.= Only dial that back so other requests they make get through cleanly. >>>> >>>> preseem is going more towards wireless monitoring etc and kinda lettin= g shaping be a secondary.... if they were doing more libreqos like stuff I'= d just stick with preseem. >>>> >>>> libreQoS may end up being the best and most net neutral product you ca= n get. The only current disadvantage (ignoring DPI) is lack of TCP accelle= ration that PQ and Bequant/cambium have. >>>> >>>> I should add that 3 states already have laws on the books that straigh= t up make PQ and Cambium's solution illegal because they target certain ser= vices for throttling. My state (Montana) has the same rule except only whe= n working with a government contract. Libreqos is actually compliant (as i= s preseem). >>>> >>>> On Sat, Nov 12, 2022 at 8:11 AM Dave Taht via LibreQoS wrote: >>>>> >>>>> this report predates the libreqos list... >>>>> >>>>> ---------- Forwarded message --------- >>>>> From: Dave Taht >>>>> Date: Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 8:15 PM >>>>> Subject: A quick report from the WISPA conference >>>>> To: Sina Khanifar >>>>> Cc: Cake List , Make-Wifi-fast >>>>> , Rpm >>>>> , Stuart Cheshire , >>>>> bloat >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 7:51 PM Sina Khanifar wro= te: >>>>> > >>>>> > Positive or negative, I can claim a bit of credit for this video :)= . We've been working with LTT on a few projects and we pitched them on doin= g something around bufferbloat. We've seen more traffic to our Waveforn tes= t than ever before, which has been fun! >>>>> >>>>> Thank you. Great job with that video! And waveform has become the got= o >>>>> site for many now. >>>>> >>>>> I can't help but wonder tho... are you collecting any statistics, ove= r >>>>> time, as to how much better the problem is getting? >>>>> >>>>> And any chance they could do something similar explaining wifi? >>>>> >>>>> ... >>>>> >>>>> I was just at WISPA conference week before last. Preseem's booth >>>>> (fq_codel) was always packed. Vilo living had put cake in their wifi = 6 >>>>> product. A >>>>> keynote speaker had deployed it and talked about it with waveform >>>>> results on the big screen (2k people there). A large wireless vendor >>>>> demo'd privately to me their flent results before/after cake on their >>>>> next-gen radios... and people dissed tarana without me prompting for >>>>> their bad bufferbloat... and the best thing of all that happened to m= e >>>>> was... besides getting a hug from a young lady (megan) who'd salvaged >>>>> her schooling in alaska using sqm - I walked up to the paraqum booth >>>>> (another large QoE middlebox maker centered more in india) and asked. >>>>> >>>>> "So... do y'all have fq_codel yet?" >>>>> >>>>> And they smiled and said: "No, we have something better... we've got = cake." >>>>> >>>>> "Cake? What's that?" - I said, innocently. >>>>> >>>>> They then stepped me through their 200Gbps (!!) product, which uses a >>>>> bunch of offloads, and can track rtt down to a ms with the intel >>>>> ethernet card they were using. They'd modifed cake to provide 16 (?) >>>>> levels of service, and were running under dpdk (I am not sure if cake >>>>> was). It was a great, convincing pitch... >>>>> >>>>> ... then I told 'em who I was. There's a video of the in-both concert= after. >>>>> >>>>> ... >>>>> >>>>> The downside to me (and the subject of my talk) was that in nearly >>>>> every person I talked to, fq_codel was viewed as a means to better >>>>> subscriber bandwidth plan enforcement (which is admittedly the market >>>>> that preseem pioneered) and it was not understood that I'd got >>>>> involved in this whole thing because I'd wanted an algorithm to deal >>>>> with "rain fade", running directly on the radios. People wanted to us= e >>>>> the statistics on the radios to drive the plan enforcement better >>>>> (which is an ok approach, I guess), and for 10+ I'd been whinging >>>>> about the... physics. >>>>> >>>>> So I ranted about rfc7567 a lot and begged people now putting routerO= S >>>>> 7.2 and later out there (mikrotik is huge in this market), to kill >>>>> their fifos and sfqs at the native rates of the interfaces... and >>>>> watch their network improve that way also. >>>>> >>>>> I think one more wispa conference will be a clean sweep of everyone i= n >>>>> the fixed wireless market to not only adopt these algorithms for plan >>>>> enforcement, but even more directly on the radios and more CPE. >>>>> >>>>> I also picked up enough consulting business to keep me busy the rest >>>>> of this year, and possibly more than I can handle (anybody looking?) >>>>> >>>>> I wonder what will happen at a fiber conference? >>>>> >>>>> > On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 7:45 PM Dave Taht via Bloat wrote: >>>>> >> >>>>> >> On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 5:02 PM Stuart Cheshire wrote: >>>>> >> > >>>>> >> > On 9 Oct 2022, at 06:14, Dave Taht via Make-wifi-fast wrote: >>>>> >> > >>>>> >> > > This was so massively well done, I cried. Does anyone know how= to get in touch with the ifxit folk? >>>>> >> > > >>>>> >> > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DUICh3ScfNWI >>>>> >> > >>>>> >> > I=E2=80=99m surprised that you liked this video. It seems to me = that it repeats all the standard misinformation. The analogy they use is th= e standard terrible example of waiting in a long line at a grocery store, a= nd the =E2=80=9Csolution=E2=80=9D is letting certain traffic =E2=80=9Cjump = the line, angering everyone behind them=E2=80=9D. >>>>> >> >>>>> >> Accuracy be damned. The analogy to common experience resonates mor= e. >>>>> >> >>>>> >> > >>>>> >> > Some quotes from the video: >>>>> >> > >>>>> >> > > it would be so much more efficient for them to let you skip th= e line and just check out, especially since you=E2=80=99re in a hurry, but = they=E2=80=99re rudely refusing >>>>> >> >>>>> >> I think the person with the cheetos pulling out a gun and shooting >>>>> >> everyone in front of him (AQM) would not go down well. >>>>> >> >>>>> >> > > to go back to our grocery store analogy this would be like if = a worker saw you standing at the back ... and either let you skip to the fr= ont of the line or opens up an express lane just for you >>>>> >> >>>>> >> Actually that analogy is fairly close to fair queuing. The multipl= e >>>>> >> checker analogy is one of the most common analogies in queue theor= y >>>>> >> itself. >>>>> >> >>>>> >> > >>>>> >> > The video describes the problem of bufferbloat, and then describ= es the same failed solution that hasn=E2=80=99t worked for the last three d= ecades. >>>>> >> >>>>> >> Hmm? It establishes the scenario, explains the problem *quickly*, >>>>> >> disses gamer routers for not getting it right.. *points to an >>>>> >> accurate test*, and then to the ideas and products that *actually >>>>> >> work* with "smart queueing", with a screenshot of the most common >>>>> >> (eero's optimize for gaming and videoconferencing), and fq_codel a= nd >>>>> >> cake *by name*, and points folk at the best known solution availab= le, >>>>> >> openwrt. >>>>> >> >>>>> >> Bing, baddabang, boom. Also the comments were revealing. A goodly >>>>> >> percentage already knew the problem, more than a few were inspired= to >>>>> >> take the test, >>>>> >> there was a whole bunch of "Aha!" success stories and 360k views, >>>>> >> which is more people than we've ever been able to reach in for >>>>> >> example, a nanog conference. >>>>> >> >>>>> >> I loved that folk taking the test actually had quite a few A resul= ts, >>>>> >> without having had to do anything. At least some ISPs are getting = it >>>>> >> more right now! >>>>> >> >>>>> >> At this point I think gamers in particular know what "brands" we'v= e >>>>> >> tried to establish - "Smart queues", "SQM", "OpenWrt", fq_codel an= d >>>>> >> now "cake" are "good" things to have, and are stimulating demand b= y >>>>> >> asking for them, It's certainly working out better and better fo= r >>>>> >> evenroute, firewalla, ubnt and others, and I saw an uptick in >>>>> >> questions about this on various user forums. >>>>> >> >>>>> >> I even like that there's a backlash now of people saying "fixing >>>>> >> bufferbloat doesn't solve everything" - >>>>> >> >>>>> >> > Describing the obvious simple-minded (wrong) solution that any = normal person would think of based on their personal human experience waiti= ng in grocery stores and airports, is not describing the solution to buffer= bloat. The solution to bufferbloat is not that if you are privileged then y= ou get to =E2=80=9Cskip to the front of the line=E2=80=9D. The solution to = bufferbloat is that there is no line! >>>>> >> >>>>> >> I like the idea of a guru floating above a grocery cart with a bet= ter >>>>> >> string of explanations, explaining >>>>> >> >>>>> >> - "no, grasshopper, the solution to bufferbloat is no line... a= t all". >>>>> >> >>>>> >> > >>>>> >> > With grocery stores and airports people=E2=80=99s arrivals are i= ndependent and not controlled. There is no way for a grocery store or airpo= rt to generate backpressure to tell people to wait at home when a queue beg= ins to form. The key to solving bufferbloat is generating timely backpressu= re to prevent the queue forming in the first place, not accepting a huge qu= eue and then deciding who deserves special treatment to get better service = than all the other peons who still have to wait in a long queue, just like = before. >>>>> >> >>>>> >> I am not huge on the word "backpressure" here. Needs to signal the >>>>> >> other side to slow down, is more accurate. So might say timely >>>>> >> signalling rather than timely backpressure? >>>>> >> >>>>> >> Other feedback I got was that the video was too smarmy (I agree), >>>>> >> different audiences than gamers need different forms of outreach..= . >>>>> >> >>>>> >> but to me, winning the gamers has always been one of the most >>>>> >> important things, as they make a lot of buying decisions, and they >>>>> >> benefit the most for >>>>> >> fq and packet prioritization as we do today in gamer routers and i= n >>>>> >> cake + qosify. >>>>> >> >>>>> >> maybe that gets in the way of more serious markets. Certainly I wo= uld >>>>> >> like another video explaining what goes wrong with videoconferenci= ng. >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> > >>>>> >> > Stuart Cheshire >>>>> >> > >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> -- >>>>> >> This song goes out to all the folk that thought Stadia would work: >>>>> >> https://www.linkedin.com/posts/dtaht_the-mushroom-song-activity-69= 81366665607352320-FXtz >>>>> >> Dave T=C3=A4ht CEO, TekLibre, LLC >>>>> >> _______________________________________________ >>>>> >> Bloat mailing list >>>>> >> Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net >>>>> >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> This song goes out to all the folk that thought Stadia would work: >>>>> https://www.linkedin.com/posts/dtaht_the-mushroom-song-activity-69813= 66665607352320-FXtz >>>>> Dave T=C3=A4ht CEO, TekLibre, LLC >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> This song goes out to all the folk that thought Stadia would work: >>>>> https://www.linkedin.com/posts/dtaht_the-mushroom-song-activity-69813= 66665607352320-FXtz >>>>> Dave T=C3=A4ht CEO, TekLibre, LLC >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> LibreQoS mailing list >>>>> LibreQoS@lists.bufferbloat.net >>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/libreqos >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> LibreQoS mailing list >>>> LibreQoS@lists.bufferbloat.net >>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/libreqos >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Robert Chac=C3=B3n >>> CEO | JackRabbit Wireless LLC >>> Dev | LibreQoS.io >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> LibreQoS mailing list >>> LibreQoS@lists.bufferbloat.net >>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/libreqos >> >> _______________________________________________ >> LibreQoS mailing list >> LibreQoS@lists.bufferbloat.net >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/libreqos > > _______________________________________________ > LibreQoS mailing list > LibreQoS@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/libreqos --=20 This song goes out to all the folk that thought Stadia would work: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/dtaht_the-mushroom-song-activity-69813666656= 07352320-FXtz Dave T=C3=A4ht CEO, TekLibre, LLC