- From: Ilya Grigorik <igrigorik@google.com>
- Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2013 15:04:08 -0800
- To: "Aaron Heady (BING AVAILABILITY)" <aheady@microsoft.com>
- Cc: Jatinder Mann <jmann@microsoft.com>, James Graham <james@hoppipolla.co.uk>, "public-web-perf@w3.org" <public-web-perf@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CADXXVKqiJRRqkoCFHP3pHx9xozqPBk+m8Yn-10fxMRXN_J0wBw@mail.gmail.com>
Somewhat of a tangent... There have been multiple requests in the past to expose the "bytes transferred" as part of Nav/Resource Timing API. While this is not a panacea, I do think it would be valuable and could address a lot of use cases we're discussing here... Or, to be more precise, give the developers the basic primitive to then build up their own abstractions to drive BW-estimation and similar use cases. </tangent> :) On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 11:44 AM, Aaron Heady (BING AVAILABILITY) < aheady@microsoft.com> wrote: > We look at data over time to create buckets of IP ranges that are very > reliably in high or low performance ranges. That could take into account > the RTT or page load provided by W3C timing, the page load time as detected > by JavaScript clocks, specific tests by downloading and measuring the > classic fixed size object and looking at network statistics, etc. Deciding > how to apply that knowledge is a whole different can of worms. > > In my experience, determining it on a per request basis just has too much > variance. Maybe if the UA kept its own set of statistics on a per origin IP > + current default gateway basis and knew that it was generally good or bad > for a given connection pair then it could pass that hint along, maybe > include a confidence hint with it (fast last 99 of 100 connections). If > that mobile device thinks it is always fast to an IP given its current > proxy, then it most likely is. > > Aaron > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jatinder Mann [mailto:jmann@microsoft.com] > Sent: Wednesday, December 4, 2013 11:20 AM > To: James Graham; public-web-perf@w3.org > Subject: RE: detecting connection speed > > I generally agree with James that this is a difficult problem to solve. > I'd love to hear use cases and how this data will actually help. > > Something not made clear in this thread is are we asking for data to make > runtime decisions or historical data for post processing like the Timing > APIs? If post processing, what do you plan to achieve with the data > considering the variability, e.g., a single browsing session could have > been on many different connection speeds? Are you trying to make some sort > of correlation like most of your users appear to be on 3G so you'll > optimize your site for that type of user? > > Jatinder > > -----Original Message----- > From: James Graham [mailto:james@hoppipolla.co.uk] > Sent: Tuesday, December 3, 2013 8:16 AM > To: public-web-perf@w3.org > Subject: Re: detecting connection speed > > On 03/12/13 16:04, Philippe Le Hegaret wrote: > > On Wed, 2013-11-27 at 09:38 +0000, Puneet Mohan Sangal wrote: > >> Is there any ongoing work in detecting connection speed, as part of > >> this group? > >> See http://www.w3.org/TR/system-info-api/#network and > >> http://www.w3.org/2012/11/performance-workshop/report.html#i4 > >> > > > > The short answer is no one is working on it in the web performance > > working group at the moment. I don't quickly see any visible progress > > on the Network Information API for the past 12 months but you may want > > to ask them if there were progress or not. > > Detecting connection speed in a useful way is a very difficult problem, > not least because it's often a time varying quantity (consider a mobile > device that might switch between wifi, 3G, 3G but with high packet loss, > and no signal at all, all in the course of interacting with a single page). > I think that in general trying to expose this kind of data can lead to > worse user experiences than not exposing it (e.g. if pages erroneously > shift into some sort of "low bandwidth" mode due to some temporary network > congestion or whatever). Therefore I don't think this should be something > that we expose, unless it is clear that we can do it in a good way that > will solve actual problems. > > >
Received on Wednesday, 4 December 2013 23:05:15 UTC