As I understand it, the problem being discussed is an oscillation that is created when the reaction occurs faster than the feedback resulting in a series of dynamically increasing overcompensations.
Owen > On Jan 3, 2016, at 21:26 , Justin Wilson <li...@mtin.net> wrote: > > Netflix is streaming video. It will try to do the best data rate it can. If > the connection can handle 4 megs a second it is going to try and do 4 megs a > second. If the network can’t handle it then Netflix will back off and adapt > to try and fit. > > Keep in mind, at least last I knew, a full HD stream was somewhere around 5 > megs a sec. If the customer has a 4 meg plan it will try and fill up that 4 > megs unless the algorithm backs off and steps it down. ISPs who run into > this on lower packages need to implement QOS at the customer level to deal > with streaming. This can be done several ways. This is one reason an > endpoint the ISP controls is a huge asset, especially if it does QOS. > > > Justin Wilson > j...@mtin.net > > --- > http://www.mtin.net Owner/CEO > xISP Solutions- Consulting – Data Centers - Bandwidth > > http://www.midwest-ix.com COO/Chairman > >> On Dec 31, 2015, at 1:39 PM, Evelio Vila <eve...@thousandeyes.com> wrote: >> >> It is actually buffer-based, as it picks the video rate as a function of >> the current buffer occupancy. >> >> See here http://yuba.stanford.edu/~nickm/papers/sigcomm2014-video.pdf >> >> -- >> evelio >> >> On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 6:56 PM, Matt Hoppes <mhop...@indigowireless.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Has anyone else observed Netflix sessions attempting to come into customer >>> CPE devices at well in excess of the customers throttled plan? >>> >>> I'm not talking error retries on the line. I'm talking like two to three >>> times in excess of what the customers CPE device can handle. >>> >>> I'm observing massive buffer overruns in some of our switches that appear >>> to be directly related to this. And I can't figure out what possible good >>> purpose Netflix would have for attempting to do this. >>> >>> Curious if anyone else has seen it? >> >
