Hi, It seems I overlooked this answer, sorry - some answers below, but also cutting stuff to keep it to the point:
> On Nov 1, 2018, at 9:20 PM, Dave Taht <[email protected]> wrote: >> Despite the undebatable importance of bufferbloat and its impact on e2e >> packet latency, this is only one of the factors playing into the "latency" >> that I perceive when I click on the link as I surf the Internet. > > Doing a breakdown of that latency - most of that seems solved... > > Background prefetch > DNS lookup > SSL connection negotiation > The actual transfer. > Screen draw.... > > I'm still missing your point. Is looking for "sparseness" part of a > CCN-like effort? No, it’s just about flow completion time (“The actual transfer”) above being a function not only of the queue length, but also of the capacity the flow gets to use. Hence the push for a larger initial window. >> Flow completion time has to do with saturation as well. > > FCT was not a subject of that draft. Right - sorry for side-tracking. > My (admittedly ranty) points were: I read them - I didn’t want to get into this debate, it was only a side comment about not all flows being limited, and there being some value in better capacity usage too. Cheers, Michael
_______________________________________________ Bloat mailing list [email protected] https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
