[Cerowrt-devel] Invisibility of bufferbloat and its remedies

Dave Taht dave.taht at gmail.com
Mon Jun 18 15:07:04 EDT 2018

On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 9:26 AM, dpreed at deepplum.com
<dpreed at deepplum.com> wrote:
> https://www.cordcuttersnews.com/3-easy-tips-to-fix-constant-buffering/
> It's distressing how little the tech press understands the real problem.

Yea, that one is pretty sad.

It still remains a field of active academic research:


> Of course, cable companies like Charter and ATT who have mostly DOCSIS 2 gear deployed can't admit to their plant being bloat-causing.
> In fact it protects their cable business against cord cutters.

Lacking competition in general, doesn't help.

What I am actually more frustrated about is the network neutrality
advocates A) conflating "buffering" with malfeasance, rather than a
technical problem
and B) Using politics rather than technology to attempt to achieve
their goals. If *only* a few prominent members of that side of affairs
"got" that some better technology, deployed, might solve some of their
problems and make the internet better for everyone, we'd make more

fq_codel is a uniquely "american" algorithm, in that it gives the
"little guy" a little boost until it achieves parity with everyone

> And the solution is needed in the CMTS once neighbors all start becoming heavier users, because it is a shared buffering pool with no fairness or bloat protection.

My principle observation is that with the changes in traffic patterns
in the last decade, and the predominance of application-rate limited
streaming, that most
folk are merely forced into a bandwidth tier that is less rarely
annoying. This does not of course solve the corporate gateway problems
very well, nor does it truly kill it dead, but until that day when
"the right stuff" is readily available, and more informed demand

I was sad to see recently a cisco white paper that even ignored their
own work on pie.

> Still, routers with queue management that reduce bloat would help a lot, if "buffering" is seen frequently under load.
> So why isn't anyone talking about this problem after at least a decade of knowing it, and knowing how to fix it?
> I blame IETF members, individually and collectively. If ietf exists for any reason other than as a boondoggle for world travel, it's for resolving issues like this one.

Heh. I have essentially abandoned the IETF as the inmates are running
the asylum, and trying to continue to make our points there was
seemingly fruitless
- and out of my budget. I'd rather stay home and get better code out
the door. Or come up with some other set of orgs to annoy into paying

I would not mind going to another IETF meeting to give a preso (on,
say, cake), but I'm unwilling to front the funds or time anymore.



Dave Täht
CEO, TekLibre, LLC
Tel: 1-669-226-2619

More information about the Cerowrt-devel mailing list