Hi Jonathan, On Apr 19, 2015, at 12:46 , Jonathan Morton <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> On 19 Apr, 2015, at 13:20, Sebastian Moeller <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Reporting the latency under load as frequency (inverse of delay time) would >> be nice in that higher numbers denote a "better” link, but has the issue >> that it is going to be hard to quickly add different latency >> sources/components... > > Personally I’d say that this disadvantage matters more to us scientists and > engineers than to end-users. Frequency readouts are probably more accessible > to the latter. The frequency domain more accessible to laypersons? I have my doubts ;) I like your responsiveness frequency roprt as I tend to call it myself, but I more and more think calling the whole thing latency cost or latency tax will make everybody understand that it should be minimized, plus it allows for easier calculations…. ;) Best Regards Sebastian > > - Jonathan Morton > _______________________________________________ Bloat mailing list [email protected] https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
