On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 10:42 PM Kevin Borgolte <ke...@iseclab.org> wrote:
> The list of websites is attached. It is extracted from the top 1,000 and > 99,000 to 100,000 of a Tranco list. > Thanks for attaching the list. Having seen a fair a number of these, I think it looks reasonable. But, I think you should add the list and the reason for the range choice to the paper. For example, I can't tell what range you actually used from your description (although that might just be due to a hurried reply). Another issue is that, while your paper might accurately capture the network conditions on your local network, it's probably doesn't capture network variation as well as a large scale test along the lines of what Mozilla did. For example, if the university used a single router brand, this could skew the test. As one data point, I've never seen the various network-throttling apps match a real-user-metrics test very well, although they do catch really problematic situations. This test is a welcome contribution, but given the data in the paper, it would be difficult to reproduce. thanks, Rob
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
