I so wish that the network nuetrality debate included discussions such as these.
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 5:53 PM, Jonathan Morton wrote:
>> On 29 Mar, 2018, at 3:26 am, Dave Taht wrote:
>>
>> A finicky bit would be who to penalize when the underlying
> On 29 Mar, 2018, at 3:26 am, Dave Taht wrote:
>
> A finicky bit would be who to penalize when the underlying medium
> (shared cable) is oversubscribed.
Two obvious reasonable solutions: share equally per subscriber, or share
proportionately to provisioned bandwidth per
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 5:04 PM, Jonathan Morton wrote:
>> On 28 Mar, 2018, at 10:32 pm, Dave Taht wrote:
>>
>> The two line method is quite common among gamers.
>
> I'm pretty sure a single A ADSL connection costs less than two from a
>
> On 28 Mar, 2018, at 10:32 pm, Dave Taht wrote:
>
> The two line method is quite common among gamers.
I'm pretty sure a single A ADSL connection costs less than two from a
bargain-basement ISP, what with line rental factoring into the total price. Of
course, not
for anyone seeing a compile error like the below on Arch Linux
CC [M] /root/sch_cake/sch_cake.o
In file included from ./include/linux/list.h:9:0,
from ./include/linux/module.h:9,
from /root/sch_cake/sch_cake.c:42:
./include/linux/kernel.h:6:10: fatal error:
The two line method is quite common among gamers.
___
Cake mailing list
Cake@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake
Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant via Cake writes:
> From: Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant
> Subject: bufferbloat still misunderstood & ignored
> To: Cake List
> Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2018 15:46:47 +
>
>
--- Begin Message ---
http://forums.thinkbroadband.com/talktalk/t/4587923-sensible-discussion-with-talktalk-about-bufferbloat.html
The thing that bothers me more than anything….. the first reply comes from a
staff member of ‘thinkbroadband’.
Cheers,
Kevin D-B
012C ACB2 28C6 C53E 9775 9123