From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ed1-x52d.google.com (mail-ed1-x52d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 143683CB38 for ; Tue, 1 Feb 2022 14:19:18 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-ed1-x52d.google.com with SMTP id w25so35640271edt.7 for ; Tue, 01 Feb 2022 11:19:17 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=2O4lspNLlYwlWamP7Pq1NIdY1z3T4NaqR6i+Z6tVoX8=; b=lbGNuiJxG5ry5kvgcucKlofuxsDIeuBwXBCMJjhdonLgl+JFaLk3dTF81Ww25oXDqI S88mbtQJcpL9ny5WLGQs/8qE6ixiCWKGxwau2rwosxWk5hEifxUoZqIySFhAXL54oLT+ imO3KFJtESBlH0ZII+8k0wEmKOsIHEHT2UUXzGGdC56VDDpLT1jOhpyA7Oh4ZlJuvemY EnRF1uC8Eu7RoeEEeV3bA0KWgr4rYXykGXkjMREvKBjwF868AkPAIzwBW4V4m/1wiohl vKpjv7gU+w3+FowTxO6Y3k+BD4VL9ubNZLDwr6ZmJLQTn9MAj4/ih5TcANQ0NO+M8LRt vlmA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=2O4lspNLlYwlWamP7Pq1NIdY1z3T4NaqR6i+Z6tVoX8=; b=k929xTRyya3gC57HIqx7XZoD6+lAzU+qoFjVMeHZoXLN0PFION9lwLeUo61arZmE+7 WAiQkeCwVijhINRZZ3ID/vS8uisgl15Rk0QarLJWS6PjrY8jjk8fQc65tmpEr1coE/UB hp3hL6HLJO3CxTOdBbZt3KSsd4wehGXy2mIt18CVRW673nPrzsR1bi1kIb0ShKHQX80f NzgghGt/4s0JmdqReaiyikoCxF2Nz+lwxDfnuu+X4gCvtpHKvyugxF2D1p+T+It2B0wD G038NqX0OHC3gxJFOR+i8Rf3lhHDdKOUjo06c5MBbn50oaW6CxjauZ9BIQyZE+J2/8Kl iNjg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532Fe7xI+12JdH/zWK5U8CCF1RvTPraBkuiz8rAIktlT46srowGd B6y9y4BRc3DSaMulyMqVqIxkWDYLdPQpjCdwhUIi4nxP X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwp/3cuKEhq45ZtAtGFLiQzqpCzX3Z8ID19dqFgdEBzI7VOBgrFtibyUcarQQS8A1odHMtuLeypXNqQUt1TQdg= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:1774:: with SMTP id da20mr26665317edb.372.1643743156883; Tue, 01 Feb 2022 11:19:16 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Dave Taht Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2022 11:19:04 -0800 Message-ID: To: Toerless Eckert Cc: Rpm Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Rpm] Test procedures for TCP stacks ? X-BeenThere: rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: revolutions per minute - a new metric for measuring responsiveness List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2022 19:19:18 -0000 "Quality" is an attribute I think about based on Deming's work on TQM, and Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. You know it when you see it, feel it, taste it, hold its heft in your hand, and wheel your bike out of the garage after a long winter and it starts right up. On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 7:27 AM Toerless Eckert via Rpm wrote: > > Are thre any well defined (RFC or the like) test procedures for the "qual= ity" > of TCP stacks ? I am especially thinking about measuring how good the > TCP stack behaves in the face of various path problems. Latency, loss, > reorder,. > > Related: > > How big a difference between goodput and throughput would one be able to > see anyhow between worst... best TCP stacks ? > > Thanks! > Toerless > _______________________________________________ > Rpm mailing list > Rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/rpm -- I tried to build a better future, a few times: https://wayforward.archive.org/?site=3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.icei.org Dave T=C3=A4ht CEO, TekLibre, LLC