[Cerowrt-devel] [aqm] the side effects of 330ms lag in the real world

Fred Baker (fred) fred at cisco.com
Tue Apr 29 03:21:31 EDT 2014

On Apr 29, 2014, at 3:08 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike at swm.pp.se> wrote:

> On Mon, 28 Apr 2014, Dave Taht wrote:
>> pretty wonderful experiment and video http://livingwithlag.com/
> Just so that everybody realises that this is an advertisement.
> Also, what access method has 300 ms access latency, let alone 3 seconds? None that I know of, the meaningful comparison would be ADSL2+ at around 25ms and 3G at around 50-100ms.

Well, we could discuss international communications. I happen to be at Infocom in Toronto, VPN’d into Cisco San Jose, and did a ping to you:

ping -c 10 swm.pp.se
PING swm.pp.se ( 56 data bytes
--- swm.pp.se ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 249.368/342.038/456.376/71.902 ms

3 seconds is unusually high, although naval satcom is frequently in the 1.5-2.5 ms range. But I have a sample that I measured in a Dublin hotel that observed standing latencies of around 280 ms to San Jose, frequent latencies of seven seconds, and a peak of 9286 ms. Yes, the hotel DSL was horrendously misconfigured. It makes a great graphic for presentations.

> -- 
> Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike at swm.pp.se
> _______________________________________________
> aqm mailing list
> aqm at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm

The ignorance of how to use new knowledge stockpiles exponentially. 
   - Marshall McLuhan

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/cerowrt-devel/attachments/20140429/9a6d68a9/attachment.sig>

More information about the Cerowrt-devel mailing list