> I don't dispute that, at least insofar as the metrics you prefer for such > comparisons, under the network conditions you also prefer. But by omitting > the conventional AQM results from the performance charts, the comparison > presented to readers is not between L4S and the current state of the art, and > the expected benefit is therefore exaggerated in a misleading way.
[JL] That is good feedback for you to send to Nokia. But as I mentioned, all our comparisons in lab and field testing are of AQM vs L4S - so we have that covered (and lots of other tests cases I won't cover here). _______________________________________________ Bloat mailing list Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
