Re: [NNagain] The FCC 2024 Section 706 Report, GN Docket No. 22-270 is out!

[rjmcmahon <rjmcmahon@rjmcmahon.com>]

> Interesting blog post on the latency part at
> https://broadbandbreakfast.com/untitled-12/.
> 
> Looking at the FCC draft report, page 73, Figure 24 – I find it sort
> of ridiculous that the table describes things as “Low Latency
> Service” available or not. That is because they seem to really
> misunderstand the notion of working latency. The table instead seems
> to classify any network with idle latency <100 ms to be low latency
> – which as Dave and others close to bufferbloat know is silly. Lots
> of these networks that are in this report classified as low latency
> would in fact have working latencies of 100s to 1,000s of milliseconds
> – far from low latency.
> 
> I looked at FCC MBA platform data from the last 6 months and here are
> the latency under load stats, 99th percentile for a selection of ten
> ISPs:
> ISP A  2470 ms
> 
> ISP B  2296 ms
> 
> ISP C 2281 ms
> 
> ISP D 2203 ms
> 
> ISP E  2070 ms
> 
> ISP F  1716 ms
> 
> ISP G 1468 ms
> 
> ISP H 965 ms
> 
> ISP I   909 ms
> 
> ISP J   896 ms
> 
> Jason

It does seem like there is a lot of confusion around idle latency vs 
working latency. Another common error is to conflate round trip time as 
two "one way delays." OWD & RTT are different metrics and both have 
utility. (all of this, including working-loads, is supported in iperf 2 
- https://iperf2.sourceforge.io/iperf-manpage.html - so there is free 
tooling out there that can help.)

Bob