
> graphs, ~5% of connections to "residential" hosts exhibit added delays
> of >=400 milliseconds, a delay that is certainly noticeable and would
> make interactive applications (gaming, voip etc) pretty much unusable.

Note the paper does not work in units of *connections* in section 2, but
rather in terms of *RTT samples*.  So, nearly 5% of the RTT samples add
>= 400msec to the base delay measured for the given remote (in the
"residential" case).

(I am not disagreeing that 400msec of added delay would be noticeable.
I am simply stating what the data actually shows.)

> Now, I may be jumping to conclusions here, but I couldn't find anything
> about how their samples were distributed. 

(I don't follow this comment ... distributed in what fashion?)

> It would be interesting if a large-scale test like this could flush
> out how big a percentage of hosts do occasionally experience
> bufferbloat, and how many never do.

I agree and this could be done with our data.  (In general, we could go
much deeper into the data on hand ... the paper is an initial foray.)

allman



