From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 522333B2A4; Wed, 26 Oct 2022 16:53:06 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.de; s=s31663417; t=1666817582; bh=9BsBh9fNZvd07fYsd3BCmy36c6ZK8uFB6ljtRxtrqL0=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=pnkGTAHfm1zOvI8fm5UBIR7RMABMB5/pHx6PzN4ZRpFbDzoTMkaA/1+fwdlP6RCRW 2KbXLjbnuQn6eIKJI+uN6ruz5SxIa+pbPSs9Ub5537cUsAge/3vphEW4V9jKF5W6tt IBDJ++FuRChrPFNSGfxo9AqfJ2iNcGSk1L01Eh6UTZdG9E55QpSo4p569bn9qnskym l7KbP7Rmr6R79bMg3QJIr67IkdFUdHMeC8rZneLRUiXi01GRuyVYsr9SQdARaecw0p BSvEkANXHKvKSHq8RECejsI1d02EVvTrkfAgGep4aAnzWq7z5hPBOx2PNdvKXx3NU+ Ni6Qc9OMiT8tw== X-UI-Sender-Class: 724b4f7f-cbec-4199-ad4e-598c01a50d3a Received: from smtpclient.apple ([84.157.42.192]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx105 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MgvrB-1pH3L91Wbl-00hQ4r; Wed, 26 Oct 2022 22:53:02 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.120.41.1.1\)) From: Sebastian Moeller In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2022 22:53:01 +0200 Cc: Stuart Cheshire , Rpm , Make-Wifi-fast , Cake List , bloat Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <74E5EB6A-A4CB-457C-A10E-4B609F699764@gmx.de> References: <938D9D45-DADA-4291-BD8A-84E4257CEE49@apple.com> <9989D2F5-3A6A-454E-ABB8-71A29F3AAC0D@gmx.de> <4BE88889-45A9-41E4-91F6-4910530A6B4C@apple.com> To: =?utf-8?Q?Dave_T=C3=A4ht?= X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3696.120.41.1.1) X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:iEyE/jqhPciFmlMYC24yIkF17e8mC5+IuWW6l+brHn1p2/cWo/h Q+Eyiu+zQ4WMhzb1lD9w6Ib98DAtIDNv77Z0/FqRdncPU2rY7UBpmJoyw4DkQoZ3lVsGJvQ a/gc/DXEqmiNLDpFgsgt57eL+QKwVBoNkbsMkEjJg9OJnNL+u5eswLtsMZcP2meYNabfZu3 gQBuuKhz6P6QYv1/0vvRQ== X-Spam-Flag: NO UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:jYfWs05MuiE=;WfQKml03Glr+FBDxSnEUE+3HMoT FWAmj+feGb6mAWIpzFRaO8fsDLNnp3qpyXI4VGPzBTOJZx52fM/bQzLO/5+R4Tb6milXjDN6K cZZ3q6gj12E3OZgduqD2qYDe+isL++jgO3xe+ksAhA4dmGC9mH8DJlvIUwBIPmkAcaz7/pzVI cJc4GIIoRS1leAi7ZuduHo4i06DaowuBDSdP7CZMhhzJaNChN/VyRMjuCwG3R2ZeSdsM8A511 NxAMYNfpdS18cQKP5vvLOLKjwoFnn8cUPN/luj/u1zYrdnIMNJNf2ltOsJV5kNHGz0WG1r0Tn p2GSRRLdNMzkIqaG7sePhCe51C12FdhlhnzlbqK2/GLt+8ogG5LBWq1j1mKerMkuwchk9jp76 wSkAk2FRh4iG1PihDsdRaxN6OiBXVYZIBwu9Ez5NZPEeGO/jAn/haqB29tXNLQaEMvV3uGXyq Mw4QoVzKH6UqkaZCvUAcrFt46BNf3SHtpwCbsk/lfEQBwrhUWLBVRNqeND7BXFbNppm01237g 3o5luGRVsGayyUwoBw8RyTyQsxMT3P5g4hesWPhKDmR2A9C+yPLKaD2grYoeSLLyjv06MeMKj xA3kLJxr+SuMzyYy6t7+E9RfVIT7Y3SeyGsEom8MmYU8fpOAkik8spfq507WDK4yJL0AajHyD lu4LiuOxEEknXIs5awearwSM4jcFMZ8SygkbssWYnDustXB9f+ZYklakCo2OsxNcPjuucEBd1 2zSl8xJZx7MgQqKAn48H2RKd22lZSLOTksgpNJYY5jhF0+xqQvMNUxyM/KpSNoCBnmcYm3h5G JopqJB23MJiQbh9L6hTRnO/NOA088u6sao/wZQRpJewakyOWraUOCFSMrs1zwc5myOL+XH1U2 Oq+jJq2oetj7WiNoSVDXaIIeXk9aP7rjzMfe1kGFJ8msfh0TX4dnjZBmPNMnNOxncxno+SmzL fuYIiJ+7C+/9ly4gtgAISa8R1Q0= Subject: Re: [Make-wifi-fast] [Rpm] The most wonderful video ever about bufferbloat X-BeenThere: make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2022 20:53:06 -0000 Hi Dave, > On Oct 26, 2022, at 22:42, Dave Taht wrote: >=20 > I loved paced chirping. [SM] Yes it sounded like a clever idea (however I would prefer a = clearer signal from the network about queue-filling). However I have = heard precious little about parced-chirping actually working in the real = internet, which IMHO means the following questions are still open: a) does it actually work under any realistic conditions? b) under which condition will it fail? c) how likely are these conditions over the existing internet? IIRC it uses packet spacing to deduce whether capacity has been reached, = and since packet spacing is a known unreliable source of information it = needs to average and aggregate to make up for operating based on = questionable data. IMHO it would be preferable to solve the = "questionable data" problem as my gut feeling is with better data would = come simpler solutions to the same challenge. Or I am simply misremembering the whole thing and be barking up the = wrong tree ;) > I also loved packet subwindows. That was allowing "rates" below one packet per RTT? > I wish we could all agree to get > cracking on working on those two things for cubic and reno rather than > whinging all the time about the stuff we will never agree on. ;). You might have seen some of my code, which should indicate that = maybe I am not going to be all that helpful in the "get cracking" = department ;) Regards Sebastian=