> On Nov 3, 2017, at 2:59 PM, Dave Taht <d...@taht.net> wrote:
>> I saw a blog posting that was enthusing about codel/fq_codel, and I was
>> moved to
>> respond that the state of the art was now cake.
>
> where?
This article (https://www.pcmech.com/article/bufferbloat-fix-slow-network/
<https://www.pcmech.com/article/bufferbloat-fix-slow-network/>) is a pretty
sub-standard explanation of bufferbloat. But I didn't want to come across as
the "smartest (smart-ass) guy in the room"
My plan was to gently correct the worst errors/misperceptions ("it's the
bottleneck, stupid") and say that the state of the art had moved ahead, even of
fq_codel, then point to the Cake page on the site.
>> But I looked at the Cake page on Bufferbloat.net <http://bufferbloat.net/>
>> and wonder if everything there
>> is true, or whether it would be good to update
>> it. https://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/codel/wiki/Cake/
>> <https://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/codel/wiki/Cake/>
>
> It's pretty much true.
Good. I will try this weekend to organize that info into a page that would
serve well readers like those from the pcmech.com <http://pcmech.com/> site
who're new to the subject, and curious about Cake/Bufferbloat.
Rich_______________________________________________
Cake mailing list
Cake@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake
