Re: Mean vs Median

> -----Original Message-----
> From: bmwg [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Paul Emmerich
> Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2015 11:56 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [bmwg] Mean vs Median
> 
> On 12.11.15 16:19, Marius Georgescu wrote:
> > [MG]  Thanks for sharing your paper. I am not sure if this solution
> > would make a good comparison base. As I see it, the test report has to
> > be synthetic enough to allow easy comparison. Reporting a single
> > number might not be enough, but reporting 10 numbers is too much imo.
> 
> Maybe the latency report can be split into two categories: typical
> latency and worst-case latency. The former being something like average
> and standard deviation (or median and 1st/3rd quartile), the latter the
> 90th and 99th percentile? A full test report should (optionally?)
> include the full CDF or histogram as a graph.
> 
> 
[ACM] 
I have been suggesting (in many places and drafts) that the "worst case"
delay should be characterized with RFC5481 PDV, so that it is a view of
delay variation and more easily comparable across test runs. The High
percentile as a single measure of PDV is built-in, and of course the
CDF or histogram is a possibility:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5481#section-4.2

Al
(as a participant)