[Rpm] the de-evolution of rpm

[Rpm] the de-evolution of rpm

[Dave Taht]

I have not been paying a lot of attention here of late. I objected to
the enormous number of flows goresponsiveness was doing, and strongly
suggested it run to time of first loss or mark. I find 4 flows enough
to stress out a network. Anyway, is the structure of networkQuality
changing any in ippm? Some context here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/amazoneero/comments/12ksu9d/sqm_optimizing_for_videoconferencing_and_gaming/jg4zsq2/?context=8&depth=9


-- 
AMA March 31: https://www.broadband.io/c/broadband-grant-events/dave-taht
Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC

Re: [Rpm] the de-evolution of rpm

[Christoph Paasch]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2185 bytes --]

Hello Dave,

> On Apr 13, 2023, at 3:13 PM, Dave Taht via Rpm <rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
> 
> I have not been paying a lot of attention here of late. I objected to
> the enormous number of flows goresponsiveness was doing, and strongly
> suggested it run to time of first loss or mark.
> I find 4 flows enough
> to stress out a network.

4 flows should often be enough to utilize a network at its full capacity. However, are 4 flows going to provide you stable working conditions in such a way that the bottleneck’s buffers are entirely full over an extended period without fluctuations due to the congestion-response of the individual flows? Also, what is the convergence time to reach stable working conditions and full buffer utilization at 4 flows?

Now, that being said. I don’t think that the exact number of flows is that important. They just need to be enough to fill the buffers in a stable way. All nit-picking on the number of flows just distracts us from actually solving problems on the Internet.

> Anyway, is the structure of networkQuality
> changing any in ippm?

Yes, the IETF-draft is continuously evolving. You can read the latest version at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ippm-responsiveness.

Discussions around the methodology and the development of the tools as well as addressing issues we find in open-source networking stacks is all happening at the “Network-quality community”, at https://github.com/network-quality/community/wiki. We have a slack-channel and a weekly meeting. Everyone who is actively working on development is invited to join our slack-channel and attend the weekly meetings. (The "active development" is a strong requirement )


Cheers,
Christoph

> Some context here:
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/amazoneero/comments/12ksu9d/sqm_optimizing_for_videoconferencing_and_gaming/jg4zsq2/?context=8&depth=9
> 
> 
> -- 
> AMA March 31: https://www.broadband.io/c/broadband-grant-events/dave-taht
> Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC
> _______________________________________________
> Rpm mailing list
> Rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/rpm


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2970 bytes --]

Re: [Rpm] the de-evolution of rpm

[Dave Taht]

I was not aware until this moment of the existence of the slack
channel, poor me!

Anyway (all?), should I discontinue this mailing list, in preference
for that? I have had had a tendency to cc rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net on
more general measurement stuff, but perhaps ippm or slack would be a
better home for it now? There are 53 users on this list, but so few
postings besides the occasional cc from the bloat list.

On Fri, Apr 14, 2023 at 1:15 PM Christoph Paasch <cpaasch@apple.com> wrote:
>
> Hello Dave,
>
> On Apr 13, 2023, at 3:13 PM, Dave Taht via Rpm <rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
>
> I have not been paying a lot of attention here of late. I objected to
> the enormous number of flows goresponsiveness was doing, and strongly
> suggested it run to time of first loss or mark.
>
> I find 4 flows enough
> to stress out a network.
>
>
> 4 flows should often be enough to utilize a network at its full capacity. However, are 4 flows going to provide you stable working conditions in such a way that the bottleneck’s buffers are entirely full over an extended period without fluctuations due to the congestion-response of the individual flows? Also, what is the convergence time to reach stable working conditions and full buffer utilization at 4 flows?
>
> Now, that being said. I don’t think that the exact number of flows is that important. They just need to be enough to fill the buffers in a stable way. All nit-picking on the number of flows just distracts us from actually solving problems on the Internet.
>
> Anyway, is the structure of networkQuality
> changing any in ippm?
>
>
> Yes, the IETF-draft is continuously evolving. You can read the latest version at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ippm-responsiveness.
>
> Discussions around the methodology and the development of the tools as well as addressing issues we find in open-source networking stacks is all happening at the “Network-quality community”, at https://github.com/network-quality/community/wiki. We have a slack-channel and a weekly meeting. Everyone who is actively working on development is invited to join our slack-channel and attend the weekly meetings. (The "active development" is a strong requirement )
>
>
> Cheers,
> Christoph
>
> Some context here:
>
> https://www.reddit.com/r/amazoneero/comments/12ksu9d/sqm_optimizing_for_videoconferencing_and_gaming/jg4zsq2/?context=8&depth=9
>
>
> --
> AMA March 31: https://www.broadband.io/c/broadband-grant-events/dave-taht
> Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC
> _______________________________________________
> Rpm mailing list
> Rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/rpm
>
>


-- 
AMA March 31: https://www.broadband.io/c/broadband-grant-events/dave-taht
Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC

Re: [Rpm] the de-evolution of rpm

[Christoph Paasch]

Hello,

> On Apr 14, 2023, at 2:02 PM, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I was not aware until this moment of the existence of the slack
> channel, poor me!

No worries! I think we announced it a while back here on the list.

> Anyway (all?), should I discontinue this mailing list, in preference
> for that? I have had had a tendency to cc rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net on
> more general measurement stuff, but perhaps ippm or slack would be a
> better home for it now? There are 53 users on this list, but so few
> postings besides the occasional cc from the bloat list.

Yes, ok to close this mailing-list from my point-of-view.


Christoph

> 
> On Fri, Apr 14, 2023 at 1:15 PM Christoph Paasch <cpaasch@apple.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Hello Dave,
>> 
>> On Apr 13, 2023, at 3:13 PM, Dave Taht via Rpm <rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
>> 
>> I have not been paying a lot of attention here of late. I objected to
>> the enormous number of flows goresponsiveness was doing, and strongly
>> suggested it run to time of first loss or mark.
>> 
>> I find 4 flows enough
>> to stress out a network.
>> 
>> 
>> 4 flows should often be enough to utilize a network at its full capacity. However, are 4 flows going to provide you stable working conditions in such a way that the bottleneck’s buffers are entirely full over an extended period without fluctuations due to the congestion-response of the individual flows? Also, what is the convergence time to reach stable working conditions and full buffer utilization at 4 flows?
>> 
>> Now, that being said. I don’t think that the exact number of flows is that important. They just need to be enough to fill the buffers in a stable way. All nit-picking on the number of flows just distracts us from actually solving problems on the Internet.
>> 
>> Anyway, is the structure of networkQuality
>> changing any in ippm?
>> 
>> 
>> Yes, the IETF-draft is continuously evolving. You can read the latest version at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ippm-responsiveness.
>> 
>> Discussions around the methodology and the development of the tools as well as addressing issues we find in open-source networking stacks is all happening at the “Network-quality community”, at https://github.com/network-quality/community/wiki. We have a slack-channel and a weekly meeting. Everyone who is actively working on development is invited to join our slack-channel and attend the weekly meetings. (The "active development" is a strong requirement )
>> 
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Christoph
>> 
>> Some context here:
>> 
>> https://www.reddit.com/r/amazoneero/comments/12ksu9d/sqm_optimizing_for_videoconferencing_and_gaming/jg4zsq2/?context=8&depth=9
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> AMA March 31: https://www.broadband.io/c/broadband-grant-events/dave-taht
>> Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC
>> _______________________________________________
>> Rpm mailing list
>> Rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net
>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/rpm
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> AMA March 31: https://www.broadband.io/c/broadband-grant-events/dave-taht
> Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC

[Rpm] Vote: Closing the rpm list?

[Dave Taht]

On Fri, Apr 14, 2023 at 2:17 PM Christoph Paasch <cpaasch@apple.com> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> > On Apr 14, 2023, at 2:02 PM, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I was not aware until this moment of the existence of the slack
> > channel, poor me!
>
> No worries! I think we announced it a while back here on the list.
>
> > Anyway (all?), should I discontinue this mailing list, in preference
> > for that? I have had had a tendency to cc rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net on
> > more general measurement stuff, but perhaps ippm or slack would be a
> > better home for it now? There are 53 users on this list, but so few
> > postings besides the occasional cc from the bloat list.
>
> Yes, ok to close this mailing-list from my point-of-view.

I will take a vote: Those here that want this list to continue, please
say aye! Vote will close in 1 week.

Or in what direction to move it? There are other measurement lists I
am on also, such as ripe's and the marconi society... I have a long
list of other (sadly unfunded, like wtbb) tools and benchmarks (like
crusader), but what limited discussion of those we have, can largely
all that can move to the bloat list.

To clarify, discussion should be on ippm anyway?

I see nearly no discussion from there. I too have found various chat
channels vastly more productive than email, myself...

>
> Christoph
>
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 14, 2023 at 1:15 PM Christoph Paasch <cpaasch@apple.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hello Dave,
> >>
> >> On Apr 13, 2023, at 3:13 PM, Dave Taht via Rpm <rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> I have not been paying a lot of attention here of late. I objected to
> >> the enormous number of flows goresponsiveness was doing, and strongly
> >> suggested it run to time of first loss or mark.
> >>
> >> I find 4 flows enough
> >> to stress out a network.
> >>
> >>
> >> 4 flows should often be enough to utilize a network at its full capacity. However, are 4 flows going to provide you stable working conditions in such a way that the bottleneck’s buffers are entirely full over an extended period without fluctuations due to the congestion-response of the individual flows? Also, what is the convergence time to reach stable working conditions and full buffer utilization at 4 flows?
> >>
> >> Now, that being said. I don’t think that the exact number of flows is that important. They just need to be enough to fill the buffers in a stable way. All nit-picking on the number of flows just distracts us from actually solving problems on the Internet.
> >>
> >> Anyway, is the structure of networkQuality
> >> changing any in ippm?
> >>
> >>
> >> Yes, the IETF-draft is continuously evolving. You can read the latest version at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ippm-responsiveness.
> >>
> >> Discussions around the methodology and the development of the tools as well as addressing issues we find in open-source networking stacks is all happening at the “Network-quality community”, at https://github.com/network-quality/community/wiki. We have a slack-channel and a weekly meeting. Everyone who is actively working on development is invited to join our slack-channel and attend the weekly meetings. (The "active development" is a strong requirement )
> >>
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Christoph
> >>
> >> Some context here:
> >>
> >> https://www.reddit.com/r/amazoneero/comments/12ksu9d/sqm_optimizing_for_videoconferencing_and_gaming/jg4zsq2/?context=8&depth=9
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> AMA March 31: https://www.broadband.io/c/broadband-grant-events/dave-taht
> >> Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Rpm mailing list
> >> Rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net
> >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/rpm
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > AMA March 31: https://www.broadband.io/c/broadband-grant-events/dave-taht
> > Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC
>


-- 
AMA March 31: https://www.broadband.io/c/broadband-grant-events/dave-taht
Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC

Re: [Rpm] Vote: Closing the rpm list?

[Frantisek Borsik]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4797 bytes --]

Aye!

On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 at 11:26 PM, Dave Taht via Rpm <
rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 14, 2023 at 2:17 PM Christoph Paasch <cpaasch@apple.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > > On Apr 14, 2023, at 2:02 PM, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > I was not aware until this moment of the existence of the slack
> > > channel, poor me!
> >
> > No worries! I think we announced it a while back here on the list.
> >
> > > Anyway (all?), should I discontinue this mailing list, in preference
> > > for that? I have had had a tendency to cc rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net on
> > > more general measurement stuff, but perhaps ippm or slack would be a
> > > better home for it now? There are 53 users on this list, but so few
> > > postings besides the occasional cc from the bloat list.
> >
> > Yes, ok to close this mailing-list from my point-of-view.
>
> I will take a vote: Those here that want this list to continue, please
> say aye! Vote will close in 1 week.
>
> Or in what direction to move it? There are other measurement lists I
> am on also, such as ripe's and the marconi society... I have a long
> list of other (sadly unfunded, like wtbb) tools and benchmarks (like
> crusader), but what limited discussion of those we have, can largely
> all that can move to the bloat list.
>
> To clarify, discussion should be on ippm anyway?
>
> I see nearly no discussion from there. I too have found various chat
> channels vastly more productive than email, myself...
>
> >
> > Christoph
> >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Apr 14, 2023 at 1:15 PM Christoph Paasch <cpaasch@apple.com>
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Hello Dave,
> > >>
> > >> On Apr 13, 2023, at 3:13 PM, Dave Taht via Rpm <
> rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> I have not been paying a lot of attention here of late. I objected to
> > >> the enormous number of flows goresponsiveness was doing, and strongly
> > >> suggested it run to time of first loss or mark.
> > >>
> > >> I find 4 flows enough
> > >> to stress out a network.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> 4 flows should often be enough to utilize a network at its full
> capacity. However, are 4 flows going to provide you stable working
> conditions in such a way that the bottleneck’s buffers are entirely full
> over an extended period without fluctuations due to the congestion-response
> of the individual flows? Also, what is the convergence time to reach stable
> working conditions and full buffer utilization at 4 flows?
> > >>
> > >> Now, that being said. I don’t think that the exact number of flows is
> that important. They just need to be enough to fill the buffers in a stable
> way. All nit-picking on the number of flows just distracts us from actually
> solving problems on the Internet.
> > >>
> > >> Anyway, is the structure of networkQuality
> > >> changing any in ippm?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Yes, the IETF-draft is continuously evolving. You can read the latest
> version at
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ippm-responsiveness.
> > >>
> > >> Discussions around the methodology and the development of the tools
> as well as addressing issues we find in open-source networking stacks is
> all happening at the “Network-quality community”, at
> https://github.com/network-quality/community/wiki. We have a
> slack-channel and a weekly meeting. Everyone who is actively working on
> development is invited to join our slack-channel and attend the weekly
> meetings. (The "active development" is a strong requirement )
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Cheers,
> > >> Christoph
> > >>
> > >> Some context here:
> > >>
> > >>
> https://www.reddit.com/r/amazoneero/comments/12ksu9d/sqm_optimizing_for_videoconferencing_and_gaming/jg4zsq2/?context=8&depth=9
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> AMA March 31:
> https://www.broadband.io/c/broadband-grant-events/dave-taht
> > >> Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> Rpm mailing list
> > >> Rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net
> > >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/rpm
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > AMA March 31:
> https://www.broadband.io/c/broadband-grant-events/dave-taht
> > > Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC
> >
>
>
> --
> AMA March 31: https://www.broadband.io/c/broadband-grant-events/dave-taht
> Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC
> _______________________________________________
> Rpm mailing list
> Rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/rpm
>
-- 
All the best,

Frank
Frantisek (Frank) Borsik

https://www.linkedin.com/in/frantisekborsik
Signal, Telegram, WhatsApp: +421919416714
iMessage, mobile: +420775230885
Skype: casioa5302ca
frantisek.borsik@gmail.com

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 7387 bytes --]

Re: [Rpm] Vote: Closing the rpm list?

[Dave Taht]

My vote is nay, close this list. I am tired of moderating it, of the
spam, keeping the server running, and would like to do more with chat
tools, moving forward. It would be nice if whatever chat tool there
was was keeping an open record...

Also bots seem interesting, a chatgpt hook, etc.

Re: [Rpm] Vote: Closing the rpm list?

[JAMES R CUTLER]

Concur

> On Apr 14, 2023, at 7:18 PM, Dave Taht via Rpm <rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
> 
> My vote is nay, close this list. I am tired of moderating it, of the
> spam, keeping the server running, and would like to do more with chat
> tools, moving forward. It would be nice if whatever chat tool there
> was was keeping an open record...
> 
> Also bots seem interesting, a chatgpt hook, etc.
> _______________________________________________
> Rpm mailing list
> Rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/rpm