<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br></span></div><div><br>On 21 May 2015, at 15:23, Jim Gettys <<a href="mailto:jg@freedesktop.org">jg@freedesktop.org</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">Providing separate grades for upload and download does not make sense to me, as interference with acks in the other direction badly hurts that traffic. Uploads and downloads are *not* independent variables.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">KISS: one grade....</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"> - Jim</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div>As a dumb user I agree with the one overall grade result. As a slightly less dumb user seeing up & down graphs is useful for tuning bandwidth limits, or I found it so at least. It's suddenly struck me as odd that a test section & graph for simultaneous up & down streams isn't included, presumably it would also be the basis for the one grade overall badge result. I guess that's feedback to dslreports if they're not already listening here.<div><br></div><div>Agree with Rich's comments re: background colours following scaling as a further pointer to bad/better/good on up/down latency differences.<br><div><br></div><div>Kevin</div><div><br></div><div>PS: As an aside I don't know if my comments/thoughts are helpful on this list or not. I know there are a lot of extremely experienced & clever people here who've been battling this problem for a long time and I fear 'stupid' questions will just try people's patience. If my dumb user observations aren't helpful please tell me to shut up!<br><blockquote type="cite"><div><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 9:45 AM, Rich Brown <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:richb.hanover@gmail.com" target="_blank">richb.hanover@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">That is interesting. I'm trying to think how the latency charts could be misconstrued, since a Y-axis on the right isn't the norm - I don't think it's hard to understand, but just different.<br>
<br>
The display as-is clearly shows that the download is badly bloated, but the upload is fine. That's the important message for most people at home. But as a researcher, you want to understand the details of the upload. So having different scales would help you see better into the problem.<br>
<br>
* If the download and upload values are substantially similar, the left and right Y-axis scales should be the same, so there wouldn't be confusion<br>
<br>
* If the values are substantially different (as in this screen shot), the pink and yellow backgrounds (on the left) and the lack of them on the right would provide a solid cue that there is something different going on between the two charts.<br>
<br>
* On the other hand, the report already shows different Y-axis values for the down/upload speeds, so the latency charts could mimic the speeds...<br>
<br>
Other thoughts?<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
Rich<br>
</font></span><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
On May 20, 2015, at 12:46 PM, Dave Taht <<a href="mailto:dave.taht@gmail.com">dave.taht@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
> I wanted to be able to have separated charts for up and down on<br>
> different scales, so I took apart what exists today in gimp and got<br>
> this:<br>
><br>
> <a href="http://snapon.lab.bufferbloat.net/~d/dslreportsmockup.png" target="_blank">http://snapon.lab.bufferbloat.net/~d/dslreportsmockup.png</a><br>
><br>
> I guess it is partially because I am getting a C on the download at<br>
> this speed, and no A+ on the upload, and I would at least like to get<br>
> a gold star from teacher for effort. :/<br>
><br>
> I dunno how to fix the download short of getting rid of several<br>
> seconds of inherent buffering in their CMTS. There must be a simple<br>
> way to do that??<br>
><br>
> --<br>
> Dave Täht<br>
> Open Networking needs **Open Source Hardware**<br>
><br>
> <a href="https://plus.google.com/u/0/+EricRaymond/posts/JqxCe2pFr67" target="_blank">https://plus.google.com/u/0/+EricRaymond/posts/JqxCe2pFr67</a><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Bloat mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net">Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net</a><br>
> <a href="https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat" target="_blank">https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat</a><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Bloat mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net">Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat" target="_blank">https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>
</div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>_______________________________________________</span><br><span>Bloat mailing list</span><br><span><a href="mailto:Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net">Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net</a></span><br><span><a href="https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat">https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat</a></span><br></div></blockquote></div></div></body></html>