Re: [Cake] bufferbloat still misunderstood & ignored

Jonathan Morton writes: >> On 30 Mar, 2018, at 11:05 am, Pete Heist wrote: >> >> So this mapping from member (subscriber) to their MACs or IPs would need to >> be configurable somewhere > > Yes, I assumed something like that would be required to assign

Re: [Cake] bufferbloat still misunderstood & ignored

> On 30 Mar, 2018, at 11:05 am, Pete Heist wrote: > > So this mapping from member (subscriber) to their MACs or IPs would need to > be configurable somewhere Yes, I assumed something like that would be required to assign the correct tier of service (or BRAS rate) to each

Re: [Cake] bufferbloat still misunderstood & ignored

> On Mar 29, 2018, at 2:53 AM, Jonathan Morton wrote: > >> On 29 Mar, 2018, at 3:26 am, Dave Taht wrote: >> >> A finicky bit would be who to penalize when the underlying medium >> (shared cable) is oversubscribed. > > Two obvious reasonable

Re: [Cake] bufferbloat still misunderstood & ignored

Ironically, in the UK my cheap ISP, Plusnet used to do QOS for free. The ASA (Advertising standards authority) decreed that ISPs that mark traffic can't claim "totally unlimited" in ads - so they turned it off. You can now pay more to opt into something similar. It could be of course that there

Re: [Cake] bufferbloat still misunderstood & ignored

I so wish that the network nuetrality debate included discussions such as these. On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 5:53 PM, Jonathan Morton wrote: >> On 29 Mar, 2018, at 3:26 am, Dave Taht wrote: >> >> A finicky bit would be who to penalize when the underlying

Re: [Cake] bufferbloat still misunderstood & ignored

> On 29 Mar, 2018, at 3:26 am, Dave Taht wrote: > > A finicky bit would be who to penalize when the underlying medium > (shared cable) is oversubscribed. Two obvious reasonable solutions: share equally per subscriber, or share proportionately to provisioned bandwidth per

Re: [Cake] bufferbloat still misunderstood & ignored

On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 5:04 PM, Jonathan Morton wrote: >> On 28 Mar, 2018, at 10:32 pm, Dave Taht wrote: >> >> The two line method is quite common among gamers. > > I'm pretty sure a single A ADSL connection costs less than two from a >

Re: [Cake] bufferbloat still misunderstood & ignored

> On 28 Mar, 2018, at 10:32 pm, Dave Taht wrote: > > The two line method is quite common among gamers. I'm pretty sure a single A ADSL connection costs less than two from a bargain-basement ISP, what with line rental factoring into the total price. Of course, not

Re: [Cake] bufferbloat still misunderstood & ignored

The two line method is quite common among gamers. ___ Cake mailing list Cake@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake

Re: [Cake] bufferbloat still misunderstood & ignored

Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant via Cake writes: > From: Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant > Subject: bufferbloat still misunderstood & ignored > To: Cake List > Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2018 15:46:47 + > >

[Cake] bufferbloat still misunderstood & ignored

--- Begin Message --- http://forums.thinkbroadband.com/talktalk/t/4587923-sensible-discussion-with-talktalk-about-bufferbloat.html The thing that bothers me more than anything….. the first reply comes from a staff member of ‘thinkbroadband’. Cheers, Kevin D-B 012C ACB2 28C6 C53E 9775 9123