From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qv1-xf2f.google.com (mail-qv1-xf2f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f2f]) (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 700913B29E for ; Wed, 6 Oct 2021 15:11:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-qv1-xf2f.google.com with SMTP id jo30so2621074qvb.3 for ; Wed, 06 Oct 2021 12:11:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=from:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:message-id:date :to; bh=+OhDypSvKShCkKZbyZr4QLf6fGkJt2SJdupEpz0FFkw=; b=o8wvK70qO2LlIvbwIl+te/9AjM82T7AP2/5i+GzbUjP+2iZd0BZ27449ergDjjmUC3 UcfD0CLy9ExcLlWl0XfAKn3P0Gh6YEBcpeVZ7hV4h24tPcoI3TJau8Of0mYdGMotUivR m5YiHETcBP3RO8SFmZaDks4c7At7/Zh+kmMOX81VGosfsF1vcC7A0coJf7Pi/KzqD01I 8F1khC6IqsVUQPV8wLLCaihJ+usg/Dw25i039vLxr/lkf01IRS3w7tbkV7twlZmxzXht nt28qn7JFjcS0+b81s1TxURahKSysdlmnWjDjEgXPplPsBTNtPjOii7JNMvBU5rnautX fPAg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :subject:message-id:date:to; bh=+OhDypSvKShCkKZbyZr4QLf6fGkJt2SJdupEpz0FFkw=; b=0InWe2rcvfapzgSNDMrBXMR4HzbvzBMJt4fWWmD+z/T/T3sgNvdDRb6S1M942zTTf0 ODaBE8BXegq4lyS/n0XxeaynElP4XUM8PpF4YJrnCpFAFLWrIWlGd6lTHWuyGFs9PjMH OXJN/VlqRIKDK7NhNqokO43VUQjyg2L6a0Kwf30vGKhWLHfGUDGHgxxuisVKrRBX6NOa c02J0ahtXggHllVOyF8ZNIBU8J3Cg5uOp8qAlz1qL4avIGYTGsB9q+z7e/ox5mYQoLkn k0S+lLHdhHlPAZYd+wSCVf3U/NYcluV6GWSuuFTsvmglr0IwM/unDvq0IhFdE4AWk3UM MozQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533RVIilc7PystiHDULHoFuHtq0UVPbqFTT2A31Asf0BI2XleAjU fteQXBEQEd0HbnlO/3aCths0TNX4oyQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwECcOZL4RSYYEvroazPrwRennB9b20PeWTMULhInQbhZ5AdD9dWNqABNyZWXBtzQ69lq4NEA== X-Received: by 2002:a0c:ee8e:: with SMTP id u14mr34793990qvr.11.1633547513955; Wed, 06 Oct 2021 12:11:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from richs-mbp-pro.lan ([198.55.239.186]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d18sm3129393qkk.3.2021.10.06.12.11.53 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 06 Oct 2021 12:11:53 -0700 (PDT) From: Rich Brown Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.7\)) Message-Id: Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2021 15:11:53 -0400 To: rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.7) Subject: [Rpm] Alternate definitions of "working condition" - unnecessary? 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: Wed, 06 Oct 2021 19:11:54 -0000 A portion of yesterday's RPM call encouraged people to come up with new = definitions of "working conditions". This feels like a red herring.=20 We already have two worst-case definitions - with implementations - of = tools that "stuff up" a network. Flent and Apple's RPM Tool drive a = network into worst-case behavior for long (> 60 seconds) and medium (~20 = seconds) terms. What new information would another "working conditions" test expose that = doesn't already come from Flent/RPM Tool? Thanks. Rich=