<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 10:11 AM, JF Tremblay <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jean-francois.tremblay@viagenie.ca" target="_blank">jean-francois.tremblay@viagenie.ca</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class=""><br>
> On Mar 19, 2015, at 9:53 AM, <a href="mailto:dpreed@reed.com">dpreed@reed.com</a> wrote:<br>
><br>
> How many years has it been since Comcast said they were going to fix bufferbloat in their network within a year?<br></span></blockquote><div><br></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small;display:inline">They had hoped to be able to use a feature in DOCSIS to at least set the buffering to the "correct" size for the provisioned bandwidth. While not fixing bufferbloat, it would have made a big difference (getting latency down to the 100ms range; that would have taken my original 1.2 seconds of bloat down to 100ms).</div></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small;display:inline"><br></div></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small;display:inline">When they went and tested that feature, the actual implementations weren't there and were so buggy, they couldn't turn it on.</div></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small;display:inline"><br></div></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small;display:inline">Moral 1: anything not tested by being used on an ongoing basis, doesn't work.</div></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small;display:inline"><br></div></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small;display:inline">Moral 2: Companies like Comcast do not (currently) control their own destiny, since they outsourced too much of the technology to others.</div></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small;display:inline"><br></div></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="">
<br>
</span>Any quote on that?<br>
<span class=""><br>
> THat's a sign that the two dominant sectors of "Internet Access" business are refusing to support quality Internet service.<br>
<br>
</span>I’m not sure this is a fair statement. Comcast is a major (if not “the” player) in CableLabs, and they made it clear that for Docsis 3.1, aqm was one of the important target. This might not have happened without all the noise around bloat that Jim and Dave made for years. (now peering and transit disputes are another ball game)<br>
<br>
While cable operators started pretty much with a blank slate in the early days of Docsis, they now have to deal with legacy and a huge tail of old devices. So in this respect, yes they are now a bit like the DSL incumbents, introduction of new technologies is over a 3-4 years timeframe at least.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small;display:inline">Yup.</div></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small;display:inline"></div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<span class=""><br>
> It's almost as if the cable companies don't want OTT video or simultaneous FTP and interactive gaming to work. Of course not. They'd never do that.<br>
<br>
<br>
</span>You might be surprised at how much they care for gamers, these are often their most vocal users. And those who will call to get things fixed. Support calls and truck rolls are expensive and touch the bottom line, where it hurts…<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small;display:inline">Yup.</div></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small;display:inline"><br></div></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small;display:inline">And I agree with Dave Taht, Comcast has had a lot more technical clue than most other ISP's we've interacted with.</div> </div><div><br></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">And these industries are captive to the practices of the companies that make the gear, and as I've said in public at the Berkman Center, this has really bad and dangerous consequences for the Internet. I'll post a new version of that talk, maybe later today.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">Now, I've yet to detect any clue it cellular ISP's.... And there, dpr's complaints I believe are correct.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"> - Jim</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"> </div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
JF<br>
(a former cable operator)<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Cerowrt-devel mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net">Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel" target="_blank">https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div>