<p dir="ltr">I don't follow, congestion won't cause latency if buffers are controlled correctly. How is QoS better in this case?</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 07/02/2013 9:27 AM, "Paul Brooks" <<a href="mailto:pbrooks-ausnog@layer10.com.au">pbrooks-ausnog@layer10.com.au</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
On 7/02/2013 8:10 AM, Nicholas Meredith wrote:<br>
><br>
> If bufferbloat gets resolved it will render QoS utterly redundant.<br>
><br>
perhaps...until a link went down and the streams re-routed to another path causing<br>
congestion, or more traffic thrown on the original path also causing congestion.<br>
Even if bufferbloat might  'get resolved', which it won't.<br>
<br>
P.<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
AusNOG mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net">AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog" target="_blank">http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog</a><br>
</blockquote></div>