RFC bandwith, packet size and latency
Harald Tveit Alvestrand
harald at alvestrand.no
Wed Jan 29 12:43:06 CET 2003
Again thanks to Henning for making these data available!
for some reason the .txt file contained 1697 lines, which didn't seem to
get all the RFCs that Henning counted, so the numbers don't quite match
up.... but I did some other calculation - looking at average delay by when
projects *started*.
The thinking behind this was that we have gotten some old things out the
door recently (DHCPv6, AAA and IPv6-addr-arch comes to mind) - if
summarizing by year of publication, finishing an old project will make the
statistics for that year look worse, while most of the errors that led to
the project being slow probably (?????) occured near the beginning of the
project.
Under the theory that people tend to optimize for what is measured, this
would encourage the termination of old projects rather than finishing them
- and the merits of doing that might be variable.
The two sets of numbers:
Delay by year of publication
1991 7 5.2
1992 29 7.2
1993 62 9.3
1994 82 9.4
1995 71 9.6
1996 105 12.1
1997 99 15.1
1998 149 17.8
1999 215 19.9
2000 252 20.6
2001 172 18.0
2002 204 22.5
2003 16 17.8
Delay by year of version 0
1991 41 14.1
1992 54 14.7
1993 69 12.9
1994 113 16.6
1995 121 18.6
1996 145 18.7
1997 230 20.2
1998 179 19.1
1999 217 18.2
2000 157 15.7
2001 108 12.6
2002 29 7.6
This seems to indicate that 1997 was the year where we started by far the
most projects that have so far concluded, and that it was (unsurprisingly)
also the year with the longest-running projects.
But the change in time-to-publish seems to be much more gradual than what
the time-to-publish by year of publication indicates.
Of course, the numbers for 2001 and 2002 are more or less meaningless - a
lot of projects started in these years will not yet have concluded.
Comments?
Harald
More information about the Problem-statement
mailing list