I was thinking about the web. You’re right about all the rest. Cheers Michael
Sent from my iPhone > On 1 Nov 2018, at 18:37, David Lang <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Thu, 1 Nov 2018, Michael Welzl wrote: > >>> On 29 Oct 2018, at 05:02, Dave Taht <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Dear Greg: >>> I don't feel like commenting much on ietf matters these days >>> but, jeeze, >> >> (snip) >> >> There seems to me to be a disconnect here, the core of which is this comment: >> >> >>> Did I rant already that the vast majority of flows are non-saturating? >> >> That's a bug, not a feature - and you seem to treat it as an unchangeable >> fact. > > Why would you think that saturating flows should be common? A very large > percentage of Internet traffic is streaming audio/video and that should never > saturate a link, it should be pacing the data to the rate of the content. > > DNS queries are not going to be saturating. > > queries to check cache validity are not going to be saturating. > > microservices calls (including most IoT data) and their replies are not going > to be saturating, in part because they don't have much to say, and in part > because even if they do have more to say, they aren't going to ramp up to > high packet rates before they run out of data to send. > > It's only bulk transfers of data that are possibly going to be saturating, > and they are only going to saturate their allowed share of the slowest link > in the path. On all other links they are going to be non-saturating. > > As links get faster, things that would have been saturating years ago fail to > saturate the new, faster links. > > So what would the Internet look like if it didn't have the vast majority of > flows being non-saturating? > > David Lang > _______________________________________________ Bloat mailing list [email protected] https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
