Dave,
We used the 25k object size for a short time back in 2012 until we had
resources to build a more advanced model (appendix A). I did a bunch of
captures of real web pages back in 2011 and compared the object size
statistics to models that I'd seen published. Lognormal didn't seem to be
*ex
tion draft
currently, the model is a single 700kB file served from a single server.
Greg
From: "dpr...@reed.com<mailto:dpr...@reed.com>"
mailto:dpr...@reed.com>>
Date: Friday, April 18, 2014 at 12:48 PM
To: Greg White mailto:g.wh...@cablelabs.com>>
Cc: Dave Taht mailt
On 4/18/14, 1:05 PM, "Dave Taht" wrote:
>On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 11:15 AM, Greg White
>wrote:
>>
>> The choice of RTTs also came from the web traffic captures. I saw
>> RTTmin=16ms, RTTmean=53.8ms, RTTmax=134ms.
>
>Get a median?
Median value was 62ms.
&
been ~12 ms.
Media access is a killer on Cable too, putting the latency floor at around 8ms
on my Docsis 3.0 Comcast service, though you can sometimes get lucky and
piggyback. to somewhat lower latency, IIRC conversations with Greg White about
how cable works.
everywhere. As I said
>> about IPv6: if it were easy, it¹d be done by now. ;-)
>>
>>>>It's almost as if the cable companies don't want OTT video or
>>>>simultaneous FTP and interactive gaming to work. Of course not. They'd
>>>>never do t
I don't have any ideas, but I can try to cross some of yours off the
list... :)
"* always on media access reducing grant latency"
During download test, you are receiving 95 Mbps, that works out to what,
an upstream ACK every 0.25ms? The CM will get an opportunity to send a
piggybacked request ap
BTW, I've heard some use the term "stochastic flow queueing" as a
replacement to avoid the term "fair". Seems like a more apt term anyway.
-Greg
On 11/27/12 3:49 PM, "Paul E. McKenney" wrote:
>Thank you for the review and comments, Jim! I will apply them when
>I get the pen back from Dave.
BTW, the SFQ-CoDel code does support the "new" flows concept in much the
same way as the linux code, so this was already included in the simulation
results.
On 5/6/13 2:47 PM, "Jesper Dangaard Brouer" wrote:
>On Mon, 6 May 2013 21:46:35 +0300 Jonathan Morton
> wrote:
>> On 6 May, 2013, at 8:5
This presumes that UDP is the only traffic that is latency sensitive (we
also consider web traffic to be latency sensitive), and that TCP carries
the bulk data that causes problems for latency sensitive traffic (AFAIK
BitTorrent uTP is layered on top of UDP).
I'm not sure that a TCP/UDP distinctio
