On 03.08.2017 13:53, Evgeny Kotkov wrote: > Stefan Sperling <s...@elego.de> writes: > >> "local network" is a rather blurry concept. >> This will often return FALSE for local wireless connections, for >> example, because of shared medium contention. >> >> I agree that 5msec is a well chosen latency threshold. >> But why not name this function after the question it answers, >> e.g. svn_ra_serf__is_low_latency_connection()? > My original intention here was to have a function that can distinguish > between LAN and WAN, using the information that we have — that's > latency now and possibly something else in the future. But indeed, > considering local wireless connections, the name of the function could > be misleading. > > Something like svn_ra_serf__is_low_latency_connection() would probably > be more appropriate right now. And, we could deal with the additional > information about the connection to base the detection on, if and when > we have that. > > I'll try to update the function name and the related comments.
It occurs to me that latency on a 10 mbps wired ethernet LAN will be about the same as on a 1000 mbps wired ethernet LAN, especially if the packets used to measure latency are small. ... but the bandwidth will be wildly different. (Just throwing this into the mix because I can't actually imagine anyone using a 10 mbps ethernet in a development environment these days, but who knows ...) -- Brane
