On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 6:00 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, 25 Sep 2014, David Lang wrote: > >> What is the problem with making this assumption? Why should we try to >> change every device on the Internet to provide this information instead of >> just using this as the default? > > Read the email that started this thread.
One saving grace of the IW10 deployment so far is that it is (mostly) limited to Linux, and that methods, such as pacing/initial spreading/fq, to cope with it better, are developing concurrently. It's not all bad - on GigE ethernet networks, it's ok, IW10 may well be useful in wifi packet aggregation, etc, but it does do potentially a great deal of damage to networks running at very low rates. My concern has largely been the collateral damage it causes network uploads from the edge, where vastly lower rates are common. It could be mitigated further in a desktop deployment by (for example) sticking with IW4 for everything going out a default gateway, and steps taken to make sure applications like bittorrent/transmission used a lower default. I have no idea what the IW is for android, but that should perhaps be lower also. I think ledbat shouldn't have an IW at all.... I would not mind if IW information was carried as a payload in dhcp/hnetd/etc... I have no problem with people suggesting changes here that require "changing the entire internet". We seem to have done that a couple times, already. :) It would be nice if we could calculate the damage it causes along whatever portion of the internet is running at below 10Mbit.... A simple question - how many T1 lines are left in the world? > -- > Mikael Abrahamsson email: [email protected] -- Dave Täht https://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/make-wifi-fast _______________________________________________ Bloat mailing list [email protected] https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
