& cplSiteName &
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View        ADD A COMMENT
<<   <   Page 12 / 18   >   >>
rjs
rjs
12/5/2012 | 4:08:37 AM
re: QOS Fees Could Change Everything
Dreamer,
what you are asking for is perfectly
rational and reasonable and technically possible.

The problem is that as a CARRIER my agenda is not
to give you what you want!!
Bits transport is a commodity and fetches a minimum premium, but when you use it to control the content, that becomes a money maker.

No transport provider should be allowed to monitor
the bits. This is the only way and should be treated as the 11th Commandment. If the carriers are facing tough times because they are way too inefficient, then they need to apply for govt bail outs just like the rest of the guys like the big airlines and the detroit automakers!!

Atleast then the taxpayers will have a fair systems and let the internet grow and add to the goverment revenue base with which they can hand out pork to these carriers.


-RJS
sgan201
sgan201
12/5/2012 | 4:08:37 AM
re: QOS Fees Could Change Everything
It is possible because what I want is for the ISP to guarantee that my entrance to the Internet is at least Y Kbps. I am not looking for end to end guarantee.

That path is totaly under my ISP control.

Dreamer

stephencooke
stephencooke
12/5/2012 | 4:08:36 AM
re: QOS Fees Could Change Everything
Mark,

Your point about the reasonable-ness of Dreamer's request and that some business manager may take it on is well taken. The business questions that need to be considered are of the flavour:

- How many people want Y bandwidth, how many want 2Y, 3Y, Y^2, 1/2 Y, etc.? If one flavour fits the vast majority of people then the FR or ATM-type approaches work best.
- What would be the cost to the carrier of implementing these types of services across the carrier's network and how is the interface between networks handled?
- What profit margin can be had for these types of traffic patterns? This often depends on the level of statistical multiplexing that the network is engineered for. It also has to do with the maximum throughput that the network can actually sustain. Current IP networks can only handle roughly 30% efficiency before packets start getting lost. Telco personnel find this really hard to digest (ie: you buy a 10GigE card you should be able to run constant 10GB/s through it right? That is what SONET/SDH and ATM do.). This is one of those telecom-quality EtherNet questions.
- Given that there will likely be a range of Y's that customers want, and are willing to pay for, how much bandwidth do I need at my DSLAMs to satisfy current and future needs?
- If the traffic crosses international boundaries how do I guarantee bandwidth and customer traffic priorities across that interface, irrespective of what Congress/FCC decides?
- If the traffic crosses international boundaries what do I have to charge to keep my revenue stream positive? Sounds like the various rates to various countries on your phone doesn't it? At least in the telephone world the bit rate/connection is fixed worldwide.

Will we get to this stage? Probably at some point. Will it happen soon? I would guess in the next 5-8 years. It will happen in individual carrier networks more quickly as video is offered.

What everyone has to see from this is that it is a HUGE undertaking to put these kinds of value-added services over the current network. The real question is whether the telcos can get 4-play and value-added services operational before their best paying customers jump to cable or not.

Steve.
Mark Seery
Mark Seery
12/5/2012 | 4:08:36 AM
re: QOS Fees Could Change Everything
PO,

So looks like I stepped on your religion, and your adult response is to what....assert I don't know anything about data communications?

Hmmmm.

I did not assert that UDP is rate-adaptive, so please don't say that I did. BTW, I think you meant NewReno (perhaps if you want to have an adult discussion you can explain how NewReno has resolved all of Reno's problems once and for all and when we will all be using it). If you don't think that over 20 years of networking experience in many capacities, i have not seen more than one approach to end to end congestion/flow control that claimed to have solved this problem once and for all then you would be mistaken. there are many smart people working on this, that does not assure it is a solveable problem.
PO
PO
12/5/2012 | 4:08:36 AM
re: QOS Fees Could Change Everything
"IMO, an equally valid whay of expressing what you said is:

-UDP does not interfere with your throughput in the same way TCP does.
-TCP was designed to protect a defenseless network against its users.
-in a network that is not dimensioned according to expected/predictable traffic demands, and does not control the entry and transit of flows (or aggregates), the potential for congestion is high.
"

Uhhh. No. Have you ever taken an introductory data networking course? If so, please ask for a refund.

UDP is not rate-adaptive. TCP is. Go buy a book on the matter and learn what that means. Go learn why Tahoe and Reno are of interest.

For one thing, it means that TCP guarantees that it will encounter congestion at at least one point along its path. Another way of saying that is that TCP will use the maximum bandwidth available to it on an end-to-end basis.
Mark Seery
Mark Seery
12/5/2012 | 4:08:36 AM
re: QOS Fees Could Change Everything
PO,

IMO, an equally valid whay of expressing what you said is:

-UDP does not interfere with your throughput in the same way TCP does.
-TCP was designed to protect a defenseless network against its users.
-in a network that is not dimensioned according to expected/predictable traffic demands, and does not control the entry and transit of flows (or aggregates), the potential for congestion is high.
Mark Seery
Mark Seery
12/5/2012 | 4:08:36 AM
re: QOS Fees Could Change Everything
There is nothing wrong with what Dreamer101 is asking for. Dreamer is simply saying that he wants the access provider to give him the option of having guaranteed bandwidth to his ISP, which he will pay more for, and then he is willing to trust that the rest of the network will work in a way that is roughly aligned with his needs. We can argue about whether the second part is realistic, but there is nothing illogical about the request.

The interesting questions are:

-what would a service provider actually charge for this; perhaps private line or frame relay provide some guides? (one being absolutely guaranteed and the other being roughly guaranteed as a function of engineering choices; and both being examples of the possibilities of engineering/business model choices).

-would a rational thinking access provider, provide this voluntarily?

-will the dynamics of competition (the rationale for less regulatory oversight) lead to this option emerging?

-what will be the result of legislation; especially if it is delayed till after the mid terms, and especially if the mid terms happen to change the make up of the congress (not asserting it will - have no idea).

Dreamers point of view is essential to understanding this debate. The debate started with the question of whether consumers should have quality access to services provided by the access provider (natively or via a controlled toll). Dreamer is turning this on its head and saying wait a minute, what I want is my own choice about what quality services I have access to. Now Dreamer may never get what he wants, but he is not the only consumer asking this very question - i.e. there is likely a market for this service, the question is whether access provider will offer it (an IMO, if there is a market for something, you can never completely discount the possibility of some business manager going after it).

It is an important question, and a question that regulators will need to take a position on eventually. Those that say the access providers have spoken with authority, are intellectually correct because SPs do own the assets - and individuals and companies should have control of what they own, but intellectually I own my pay check as well, however in practice, this appears not to be the case (for example the money the government takes out every week without my permission).

On this journey, it seems there are at least two distinct paths that could be taken: a) assert what the future will be (which would require a knowledge of both legislation and competitive dynamics; at least) or b) assert what is the right future as a way of either honing arguments for the upcoming fight over legislation, or as a way of revealing what upcoming arguments will be. I may be wrong, but I think I detect more of B) than A) - even granting A) is somewhat related to B).

It would certainly be interesting to hear more commentary on what people think the actual legislation will be (and when), and why they think congress will arrive at that legislation (not simply that a certain legislation is aligned with their view of what is right).
PO
PO
12/5/2012 | 4:08:36 AM
re: QOS Fees Could Change Everything
"what I want is for the ISP to guarantee that my entrance to the Internet is at least Y Kbps"

Your entrance to the Internet is the point at which your home network interfaces with your service provider's network: the inter-networking point. Which is within your DSL- or Cable-Modem.

Your service provider could probably provide some sort of assurance of some minimum bandwidth at the first edge device on their network, but what would be the point? TCP has its own congestion control and will regulate the bandwidth available to you based on all congestion points along the entire path. And UDP has no congestion control and operates on a best-effort basis only.

These are basic features of Internet Protocol packet transport. If you want different behaviour, you have to start with TCP and IP. And you'll have to rewrite BGP as well.

MPLS tries to run multiple segregated networks, but doesn't really address congestion on those networks except to try to adjust occupancy and capacity. And since it doesn't operate end-to-end, it doesn't address end-to-end congestion: it only helps you if you assume that your own service provider is in charge of the most congested segments of your path.
Mark Seery
Mark Seery
12/5/2012 | 4:08:35 AM
re: QOS Fees Could Change Everything
PO,

And perhaps if you reviewed the subject, you might realise that what you are discussing is probably inconsistent with the networking theory the access providers are proposing.

You are noodling down on one theory of networking and asserting that it is the only way of looking at things; and when you get an alternate view your reaction is to make attacks and then mark down the responses.
PO
PO
12/5/2012 | 4:08:35 AM
re: QOS Fees Could Change Everything
Mark, perhaps you could simply review what the subject is of the discussion. I merely pointed out that what is being suggested is inconsistent with the tools in use today.
<<   <   Page 12 / 18   >   >>


Featured Video
Upcoming Live Events
October 22, 2019, Los Angeles, CA
November 5, 2019, London, England
November 7, 2019, London, UK
November 14, 2019, Maritim Hotel, Berlin
December 3-5, 2019, Vienna, Austria
December 3, 2019, New York, New York
March 16-18, 2020, Embassy Suites, Denver, Colorado
May 18-20, 2020, Irving Convention Center, Dallas, TX
All Upcoming Live Events