Re: [Bloat] an observation from the field

2018-08-28 Thread Jonathan Morton
> On 29 Aug, 2018, at 2:53 am, David Collier-Brown wrote: > > Humans experience delays directly, and so perceive systems with high latency > as "slow". The proverbial "man on the Clapham omnibus" therefor responds to > high-latency systems with disgust. > > A trained scientist, however, runs

Re: [Bloat] [bbr-dev] new paper from Kleinrock on "Power" and to some extent BBR

2018-08-28 Thread David Collier-Brown
On 2018-08-27 10:12 p.m., Dave Taht wrote: On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 6:02 PM Jonathan Morton wrote: On 28 Aug, 2018, at 3:59 am, Dave Taht wrote: "Internet congestion control using the power metric: Keep the pipe just full, but no fuller" is quite a good read (appears to be open access pdf,

Re: [Bloat] an observation from the field

2018-08-28 Thread David Collier-Brown
On 2018-08-28 1:07 p.m., Dave Taht wrote: In looking over the increasingly vast sqm-related deployment, there's a persistent data point that pops up regarding inbound shaping at high rates. We give users a choice - run out of cpu at those rates or do inbound sqm at a rate their cpu can afford.

Re: [Bloat] an observation from the field

2018-08-28 Thread Jonathan Foulkes
Dave, very interesting to hear. In my dataset, I find that non-technical users respond positively to the benefits of low-latency, even if the speedtest metrics show much lower numbers than their plan indicates. Stuff happens quicker, and more consistently, therefore they are happy. It’s the

[Bloat] an observation from the field

2018-08-28 Thread Dave Taht
In looking over the increasingly vast sqm-related deployment, there's a persistent data point that pops up regarding inbound shaping at high rates. We give users a choice - run out of cpu at those rates or do inbound sqm at a rate their cpu can afford. A remarkable percentage are willing to give