From: "Livingood, Jason" <jason_livingood@comcast.com>
To: "Network Neutrality is back! Let´s make the technical aspects
heard this time!" <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: [NNagain] The FCC 2024 Section 706 Report, GN Docket No. 22-270 is out!
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2024 21:06:10 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <766106EC-9F2B-4440-B7A6-5AA483EF45F0@comcast.com> (raw)
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 978 bytes --]
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
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3632 bytes --]
next reply other threads:[~2024-02-27 21:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-02-27 21:06 Livingood, Jason [this message]
2024-02-27 22:00 ` rjmcmahon
2024-02-27 23:17 ` Jack Haverty
2024-02-27 23:41 ` Jeremy Austin
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2024-02-26 15:06 Dave Taht
2024-02-26 19:24 ` Jack Haverty
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://lists.bufferbloat.net/postorius/lists/nnagain.lists.bufferbloat.net/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=766106EC-9F2B-4440-B7A6-5AA483EF45F0@comcast.com \
--to=jason_livingood@comcast.com \
--cc=nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox