Re: [Starlink] The "reasons" that bufferbloat isn't a problem

["David Fernández" <davidfdzp@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1449 bytes --]

Is L4S a solution to bufferbloat? I have read that gamers are happy with it.

Sorry, I read it here, in Spanish:
https://www.adslzone.net/noticias/operadores/retardo-videojuegos-nokia-vodafone

Regards,

David F.

Date: Tue, 7 May 2024 06:50:41 -0400
From: Rich Brown <richb.hanover@gmail.com>
To: Eugene Y Chang <eugene.chang@ieee.org>
Cc: Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>, Colin_Higbie
        <CHigbie1@Higbie.name>, Dave Taht via Starlink
        <starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: [Starlink] The "reasons" that bufferbloat isn't a problem
Message-ID: <175CC5C3-F70A-49E8-A84D-87E24C04EABD@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Hi Gene,

> On May 6, 2024, at 8:38 PM, Eugene Y Chang <eugene.chang@ieee.org> wrote:
>
> It seems like you signed off on this challenge. Don’t do that. Help give
me the tools to push this to the next level.

Not at all - I'm definitely signed up for this. But I collected all these
points so we can be clear-eyed about the objections that people cite.

Bufferbloat definitely exists. And there are straightforward technical
solutions. And as you say, our challenge is to find a way to build the case
for broad adoption of these techniques.

Best regards,

Rich
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/starlink/attachments/20240507/ecb7b91e/attachment-0001.html>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2403 bytes --]