Alex,
At 09:31 25/02/2015, Alex Elsayed wrote:
It was less a criticism of your work itself, and more pointing out that Bob
Briscoe was applying research on symmetric paths to asymmetric paths without
questioning the applicability of its conclusions.
Mea culpa.
Just one ambiguous inference and the whole list explodes!
When I said "The paper convinced me that ARED is good enough (in the
paper's simulations it was often better than PIE or CoDel),"
I didn't mean 'good enough to go ahead and deploy'. Don't worry we're
testing out ARED. I meant good enough to make it the centre of my
attention. (I did say "consider deploying" later in the sentence).
Our ARED testing is focusing on whether there are any pathologies,
rather than whether it is slightly better or worse than the perfect
solution X that will takes a decade to make any difference to the majority.
It's interesting that no-one picked up on the sentence "This could
reduce deployment completion time from decades to a few months."
I take that as a symptom that the bufferbloat list is mainly
populated by implementers. If there's a nail that can't be hit with
the implementation hammer, it seems it's not an interesting nail,
even if it's an extremely important nail.
Bob
________________________________________________________________
Bob Briscoe, BT
_______________________________________________
Bloat mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
