Alan Jenkins <[email protected]> writes: > I wouldn't complain that I can't sustain 2056Kbps goodput when my fair > share of the shaped bandwidth is 2000Kbps. The results might be > showing a significant degradation, or it could be a marginal one that > pushes over the boundary (between the 2056k and 1427k encodes). Which > of those conclusions you start from might be influenced by whether > you're developing a different AQM, hmm.
Exactly. And note how they just so happen to pick 11 total flows (10 competing, one video) to share the bottleneck, putting the per-flow throughput just below the rate needed to go up one quality level. What a coincidence. At least it shows how difficult it is to design experiments that put fairness queueing in a bad light ;) Oh, and of course HAS is in itself a hack to work around badly managed queues in the network. In a nicely fairness queued world, we could do away with HAS entirely and just, y'know, stream things at the desired rate... -Toke _______________________________________________ Bloat mailing list [email protected] https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
