it also will not go below a certain rate, and perhaps that quality can stay
> relatively good in spite of high network loss?
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Jake
>
>
>
> *From: *Luca Muscariello
> *Date: *Tuesday, April 28, 2020 at 1:54 AM
> *To: *Dave Taht
> *Cc: *ts
loss?
Best regards,
Jake
From: Luca Muscariello
Date: Tuesday, April 28, 2020 at 1:54 AM
To: Dave Taht
Cc: tsvwg IETF list , bloat
Subject: Re: [Bloat] my backlogged comments on the ECT(1) interim call
Hi Dave and list members,
It was difficult to follow the discussion at the meeting
Hi Dave and list members,
It was difficult to follow the discussion at the meeting yesterday.
Who said what in the first place.
There have been a lot of non-technical comments such as: this solution
is better than another in my opinion. "better" has often been used
as when evaluating the taste
It looks like the majority of what I say below is not related to the
fate of the "bit". The push to take the bit was
strong with this one, and me... can't we deploy more of what we
already got in places where it matters?
...
so: A) PLEA: From 10 years now, of me working on bufferbloat, working
