The graph below the upload and download is what is new.
(unfortunately you do have to be logged into the site to see this)
it shows the latency during the upload and download, color coded. (see
attached image).
In your case during the upload it spiked to ~200ms from ~50ms but it was
not so bad. Du
What I see here is the same old latency, upload, download series, not
latency and bandwidth at the same time.
http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/319616
On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 5:57 PM, Rich Brown wrote:
> Folks,
>
> I am delighted to pass along the news that Justin has added latency
> measurem
Folks,
I am delighted to pass along the news that Justin has added latency
measurements into the Speed Test at DSLReports.com.
Go to: https://www.dslreports.com/speedtest and click the button for your
Internet link. This controls the number of simultaneous connections that get
established betw
On Apr 18, 2015 13:33, "David Lang" wrote:
>
> On Sat, 18 Apr 2015, Ketan Kulkarni wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> We have been talking about the bloated buffers mostly on the home
routers.
>> The Cisco PIE too has been standardized by docsis meant to be for cable
>> modems
>>
>> I think we would have similar
On Sat, 18 Apr 2015, Ketan Kulkarni wrote:
Hi,
We have been talking about the bloated buffers mostly on the home routers.
The Cisco PIE too has been standardized by docsis meant to be for cable
modems
I think we would have similar concerns for switches and routers. (E.g.
cat3k switches or Cisco
On Fri, 17 Apr 2015, sahil grover wrote:
Anyone please tell me what are requirements for taking this test:
1) About Operating System :
which os is best- windows or ubuntu?
can i use windows?
whatever you are running
2) can i test it on home network for bufferbloat?
or should i look for so
On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 12:24:28PM -0700, Ketan Kulkarni wrote:
>> For Cat3k switches, I can assure you there's no bufferbloat -- they are
>> badly underbuffered.
> Generically does that mean bufferbloat is the problem predominantly seen
> for the cable industry?
No. There are tons of other device
Thanks Steinar.
I do have some follow up questions.
Thanks
Ketan
On Apr 18, 2015 12:12, "Steinar H. Gunderson"
wrote:
>
> On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 12:07:26PM -0700, Ketan Kulkarni wrote:
> > I think we would have similar concerns for switches and routers. (E.g.
> > cat3k switches or Cisco 5760 co
On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 12:07:26PM -0700, Ketan Kulkarni wrote:
> I think we would have similar concerns for switches and routers. (E.g.
> cat3k switches or Cisco 5760 controllers just to name)
For Cat3k switches, I can assure you there's no bufferbloat -- they are badly
underbuffered.
/* Steinar
Hi,
We have been talking about the bloated buffers mostly on the home routers.
The Cisco PIE too has been standardized by docsis meant to be for cable
modems
I think we would have similar concerns for switches and routers. (E.g.
cat3k switches or Cisco 5760 controllers just to name)
I would like
Toke Høiland-Jørgensen writes:
> The Great Renaming (of netperf-wrapper) has now entered its final phase
> (i.e., I have to make a decision now).
Thank you to everyone who chimed in on this, both on and off list!
Netperf-wrapper will henceforth be known as "Flent: The Flexible Network
Tester".
"Eggert, Lars" writes:
> (I was interested in the delay an application sees on top of a TCP
> stream, which is not something Toke's excellent netperf-wrapper tool
> can currently do, AFAIK.)
You're quite right. If a version of this makes it upstream in netperf,
I'm quite happy to add in a parser
12 matches
Mail list logo
