[Bloat] RED against bufferbloat

[Bob Briscoe]

Alex,

At 09:31 25/02/2015, Alex Elsayed wrote:
>It was less a criticism of your work itself, and more pointing out that Bob
>Briscoe was applying research on symmetric paths to asymmetric paths without
>questioning the applicability of its conclusions.

Mea culpa.
Just one ambiguous inference and the whole list explodes!

When I said "The paper convinced me that ARED is good enough (in the 
paper's simulations it was often better than PIE or CoDel),"

I didn't mean 'good enough to go ahead and deploy'. Don't worry we're 
testing out ARED. I meant good enough to make it the centre of my 
attention. (I did say "consider deploying" later in the sentence).

Our ARED testing is focusing on whether there are any pathologies, 
rather than whether it is slightly better or worse than the perfect 
solution X that will takes a decade to make any difference to the majority.

It's interesting that no-one picked up on the sentence "This could 
reduce deployment completion time from decades to a few months."
I take that as a symptom that the bufferbloat list is mainly 
populated by implementers. If there's a nail that can't be hit with 
the implementation hammer, it seems it's not an interesting nail, 
even if it's an extremely important nail.



Bob


________________________________________________________________
Bob Briscoe,                                                  BT