nanog mailing list archives
Re: Did *bufferbloat* cause the 2010 flashcrash?
From: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists () gmail com>
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2015 12:58:50 -0400
On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 12:51 PM, John Kristoff <jtk () cymru com> wrote:
It would seem surprising that delays in general due to long queues would not have been noticed before, since or would have caused other more far reaching problems.
bufferbloat is the boogieman... of late. I think that's foolish :( I think this comment from jtk is really on point though! 'why only then?' that sure seems convenient, eh?
Current thread:
- Did *bufferbloat* cause the 2010 flashcrash? Jay Ashworth (Aug 02)
- Re: Did *bufferbloat* cause the 2010 flashcrash? John Kristoff (Aug 06)
- Re: Did *bufferbloat* cause the 2010 flashcrash? Christopher Morrow (Aug 06)
- Re: Did *bufferbloat* cause the 2010 flashcrash? Sean Donelan (Aug 06)
- Re: Did *bufferbloat* cause the 2010 flashcrash? joel jaeggli (Aug 06)
- RE: Did *bufferbloat* cause the 2010 flashcrash? Matthew Huff (Aug 06)
- Re: Did *bufferbloat* cause the 2010 flashcrash? Christopher Morrow (Aug 06)
- Re: Did *bufferbloat* cause the 2010 flashcrash? John Kristoff (Aug 06)
- Re: Did *bufferbloat* cause the 2010 flashcrash? William Herrin (Aug 06)
- Re: Did *bufferbloat* cause the 2010 flashcrash? Harlan Stenn (Aug 06)