[AusNOG] QoS on Internet traffic

[Paul Wilkins]

It's interesting that we're seeing around the globe a push to impose by
legislation net neutrality, as a means to prevent market forces who want to
do exactly that. Rather puts them on the wrong side of history. While the
differential exists between value as dictated by the market, and
legislatively imposed externalities, we'll continue to see content
industries subsidising the advertisers.

Kind regards

Paul Wilkins

On 20 August 2017 at 11:49, Mark Smith <markzzzsmith at gmail.com> wrote:

> Geoff arrived early, tried out QoS, wrote a book on it, then gave up on it.
>
> http://www.potaroo.net/ispcol/2012-06/noqos.html
>
>
>
> On 20 Aug. 2017 11:07 am, "Paul Wilkins" <paulwilkins369 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> For those who arrived late, this 2015 article goes to some length to
> elaborate on the QoS ramifications of the FCC's Title II ruling for
> broadband:
>
> https://www.cnet.com/news/13-things-you-need-to-know-about-t
> he-fccs-net-neutrality-regulation/L
>
> Kind regards
>
> Paul Wilkins
>
> On 19 August 2017 at 15:49, Jamie Baddeley <jamie.baddeley at vpc.co.nz>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 19 August 2017 at 16:57, Matt Palmer <mpalmer at hezmatt.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, Aug 19, 2017 at 01:00:39PM +1000, Paul Wilkins wrote:
>>> > If your client sites have redundant links, you can get massive
>>> performance
>>> > benefit by routing bulk transfer via the backup path.
>>> >
>>> > As for there is no QoS on the internet, that's mostly because US
>>> service
>>> > providers are legislatively blocked from what would be a departure
>>> from net
>>> > neutrality.
>>>
>>> <eyeroll>
>>>
>>> It's got nothing to do with Net Neutrality.  If it was, (a) it would have
>>> happened long before any of that got started, and (b) the rest of the
>>> world,
>>> which is not similarly constrained, would be doing it, and everything
>>> would
>>> be just peachy.
>>>
>>> No, the problem with QoS on the Internet is the same as allowing senders
>>> to
>>> mark e-mails with priorities: everyone thinks *their* traffic is
>>> important,
>>> so everyone marks their packets / e-mails as "TOP PRIORITY", and you're
>>> back
>>> to exactly the same situation you're in now, where everything's
>>> best-effort
>>> and nobody is particularly happy.
>>>
>>> - Matt
>>>
>>> Indeed. There is no QoS on the Internet because Best Effort is the only
>> standard everyone can agree on. Of course some 'Best Efforts' are better
>> than others, but that's life.
>>
>> Now, you can use some of the various techniques described in this thread.
>> But that's not QoS. It's just making a better effort. Which is good.
>>
>> jamie
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20170820/c60fc8cf/attachment.html>