Re: [76attendees] A Net Neutrality comment

Nothing like data to make a point! Thanks.

On Nov 9, 2009, at 9:05 AM, Fred Baker wrote:

> A remark to those who take a militant libertarian view of Net  
> Neutrality, and those of ledbat and tcpm who have difficulty  
> understanding why transports should tune to the knee (just enough of  
> data outstanding, aka cwnd, to maintain the maximum goodput) as  
> opposed to the cliff (the knee plus the maximum depth of the  
> bottleneck queue, at which point throughput has not increased but  
> loss has increased).
>
> Saturday night, as I do many nights that I spend at hotels, I ran a  
> ping study to characterize the network. It was obviously massively  
> overprovisioned - it was difficult to register RTT variance in  
> excess of a millisecond trans-pacific between Japan and the US. I  
> did this again last night. The network behavior as measured from my  
> room was equally stable until about 11:58 PM; at that point, someone  
> fired up something huge, my guess being something that uses  
> bittorrent, delay dramatically increased, and my VPN went down  
> within a couple of minutes. When this happens, customers call ISPs  
> and ISPs start throttling applications, because the applications are  
> doing horrible things to the ISPs' customers.
>
> The attached are a case in point.
>
>
>
> <Hiroshima-room-Sunday-8-Nov-2009-reduced.xlsx.pdf><Hiroshima-room- 
> Saturday-7-Nov-2009-reduced.xlsx.pdf><Hiroshima-room-Saturday-7- 
> Nov-2009-reduced.xlsx.pdf>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 76attendees mailing list
> 76attendees@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/76attendees