[AusNOG] News: Telstra to clamp down on peer-to-peer

[Phillip Grasso]

buffers are for whimps. ;-p


On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 11:21 AM, Craig Askings <craig at askings.com.au> wrote:

> Ok so the buffers are now full and a voice packet arrives. Do you want the
> router / switch to drop that voice packet or choose another packet to take
> one for the team? That is what QoS is for, even with small buffers you
> still need QoS to pick the loser.
>
> Craig.
>
> On 07/02/2013, at 10:11 AM, Nicholas Meredith <nicholas at udhaonline.net>
> wrote:
>
> I don't follow, congestion won't cause latency if buffers are controlled
> correctly. How is QoS better in this case?
> On 07/02/2013 9:27 AM, "Paul Brooks" <pbrooks-ausnog at layer10.com.au>
> wrote:
>
>> On 7/02/2013 8:10 AM, Nicholas Meredith wrote:
>> >
>> > If bufferbloat gets resolved it will render QoS utterly redundant.
>> >
>> perhaps...until a link went down and the streams re-routed to another
>> path causing
>> congestion, or more traffic thrown on the original path also causing
>> congestion.
>> Even if bufferbloat might  'get resolved', which it won't.
>>
>> P.
>> _______________________________________________
>> AusNOG mailing list
>> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>>
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20130207/5fdef8f6/attachment.html>