Hi, Just to clarify -- the credit goes to 'saltspork' on that thread, not I :)
Cheers, > On 12 Mar 2015, at 1:11 pm, Dave Taht <[email protected]> wrote: > > I was very pleased to see this tweet go by today: > > https://twitter.com/mnot/status/575581792650018816 > > where Mark Nottingham fixed his bufferbloat on bigpond cable > using a very simple htb + fq_codel script. (I note ubnt edgerouters > also have a nice gui for that, as does openwrt) > > But: he does point out a flaw in netanalyzr's current tests[1], in that > it does not correctly detect the presence of aqm or FQing on the link, > (in part due to not running long enough, and also in not using > multiple distinct flows) and like the "ping loss considered harmful" > thread last week on the aqm and bloat lists, matching user > expectations and perceptions would be good with any public > tests that exist. > > There is some stuff in the aqm evaluation guide's "burst tolerance" > tests that sort of applies, but... ideas? > > [1] I am not aware of any other tests for FQ than mine, which are still > kind of hacky. What I have is in my isochronous repo on github. > > -- > Dave Täht > Let's make wifi fast, less jittery and reliable again! > > https://plus.google.com/u/0/107942175615993706558/posts/TVX3o84jjmb -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ _______________________________________________ Bloat mailing list [email protected] https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
