From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lj1-x232.google.com (mail-lj1-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::232]) (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 8CAA13CBFE for ; Tue, 7 May 2024 08:14:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-lj1-x232.google.com with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-2e30c625178so27556201fa.1 for ; Tue, 07 May 2024 05:14:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1715084058; x=1715688858; darn=lists.bufferbloat.net; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to; bh=EdxDa3/s7CpfDetuPkOOesIwanfFKfBP4DHUI6WEabM=; b=QCSl47jlLFYNc9h7hFIZf/7Kg5/Dxs3CqSGehPXa4vOKaCb4gsJi923/YJwARDHhKf VpL2ZSTC8AhaiV6ci//61ccpRy2Ot1ArLxG5VSFwhZ6SzPd3DcMSRq4AaLLN/9UaWdAv z7xt4ZckUMh1pjvCpe+ogQnY9xk7qmOiddgzQi5TWwbH1MWyKwxBp1d2jvvAw8u91X14 Gd5cniJO05jgHRWQVwg1PlslgBLUqBrpFTdR+jYIXj6VnxVB4N963XZlDUwNHtKAOOh8 OpUfiGMjR0ldXUbPWVweJ60dhDgRoVGIaTXPfft7iz7/QRUav0WiG8CfBMN3OySIfJ/c ZOBQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1715084058; x=1715688858; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:mime-version:x-gm-message-state :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=EdxDa3/s7CpfDetuPkOOesIwanfFKfBP4DHUI6WEabM=; b=NaMKoRzv4v6mQIKegPIRrhc7fjjOugjnkpxury6oHfB4vZ+iRbIxc+UGLhM0BgywFJ +XaFPfyKkSpwRXwdWY1UepL7Vrnc2OWVbBm9kgzBymDGKwxvcqqQLeaXg/B6ZkQXm1eg ZqPmKBr9yZW//LmSnZV6XDFPoZ7d78Os/0l5CvExwe7SkJgRobKzn0Z1A7GpkUaOYy4Y OYS3N7dR/18FCdxyo20xzEJ/TPPED1cN4udoFO+9zbqymRN5YAhiCGiTMaHgCcY9mm4+ Ndx3MlAkJ85C1uweMHkptigfGysrYqV2OXIJi0EWjOGT4DG1bqme3piUUJknQoyLDey0 33TA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwtFQCoEAnciYHsvOXSc5ClZ+UqYcQIxC3r7Xi3zSsXOSGY5+ri NaTXh2AB01xFTqUgX7ZlEc51GQ15PHTty/zwBQ+HDtpLt4eoFW3G0+4VtGT4l+JhjMR9qx14cfh acz3KAOa4Y9GwxXaHauSxbVMWZKh261Mulrnlpw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFD9iV3CNEJ5TsqyCl+DcsojgPT5XSTNaTX3PSyJXwY9asc7eQPMZatq14fWUMpa8xvJ5uBgUT4tTf6M4EtjbQ= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:8186:0:b0:2e3:38e0:54c7 with SMTP id e6-20020a2e8186000000b002e338e054c7mr4537779ljg.38.1715084058323; Tue, 07 May 2024 05:14:18 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: =?UTF-8?Q?David_Fern=C3=A1ndez?= Date: Tue, 7 May 2024 14:13:41 +0200 Message-ID: To: starlink Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000000e75640617dc2066" Subject: Re: [Starlink] The "reasons" that bufferbloat isn't a problem X-BeenThere: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: "Starlink has bufferbloat. Bad." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 May 2024 12:14:20 -0000 --0000000000000e75640617dc2066 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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-voda= fone Regards, David F. Date: Tue, 7 May 2024 06:50:41 -0400 From: Rich Brown To: Eugene Y Chang Cc: Sebastian Moeller , Colin_Higbie , Dave Taht via Starlink 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=3D"utf-8" Hi Gene, > On May 6, 2024, at 8:38 PM, Eugene Y Chang wrote: > > It seems like you signed off on this challenge. Don=E2=80=99t do that. He= lp 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/ecb7b= 91e/attachment-0001.html> --0000000000000e75640617dc2066 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Is L4S a solution to bufferbloat? I have read that ga= mers are happy with it.

Sorry, I read it here, in = Spanish:

Regar= ds,

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
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 <CHigbie1@Higbie.name>, Dave Taht via Sta= rlink
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 <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=3D"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=E2=80=99t 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=20 these points so we can be clear-eyed about the objections that people=20 cite.

Bufferbloat definitely exists. And there are straightforward technical=20 solutions. And as you say, our challenge is to find a way to build the=20 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/202405= 07/ecb7b91e/attachment-0001.html>
--0000000000000e75640617dc2066--