[AusNOG] "It's like grandfather's axe"

[Mark Delany]

On 26Nov13, Mark ZZZ Smith allegedly wrote:
> I think "QoS" is way to a general term for this. Non-technical users/customers (i.e., the general public) are likely to think it means that their ISP is making assurances about the performance of the whole of the Internet. ?

Agreed. I wouldn't want me to be taken too literally, but I figured
that folk on this list would get the gist of a minimal QOS for the
last mile. It's not even clear to me that customers would need to know
what the "out-of-spec" light means excepting that their ISP is obliged
to fix it.

> The service providers I've worked for haven't tried to hide behind anything. On a many occasions many of their staff have gone out of their way to resolve hard issues, raised in non-official support forums like Whirlpool, quite often in their own time, including me.

I believe it. Just the other day a friend of mine was telling me that
their ISP rep drove something like 40 km to his house to diagnose a TW
service they resold. Regional Victoria.

Call me crazy, but I don't think that's a resellers job to do, but do
it they must.  It must be one of the most frustrating parts of being a
TW reseller.

> So here's a bit of history of broadband in Australia, regarding link speeds.

Which I think proves the point. The incumbent only does stuff when
pushed - whether that's by hungry competitors or regulators.

> So maybe the CPE instead should have both an "out of spec" light, and a "better than spec" light, so that customers could appreciate that they were getting more than an assured universal minimum when they can.

Oh, you mean the marketing light? Sure, why not. I've heard that a
gauge reading 110% is popular :-)

> Currently Telstra don't have any incentive to use ADSL statistics to judge the quality of a line or use them for troubleshooting. Telstra are only obligated by regulation to deliver an adequate voice service. Going any further costs them money, with no financial benefit.

Oh I completely understand why they don't do it. But is that good
enough for an NBN that's pretty close to a universal service?

My concern is that the status quo is now likely to prevail and the
only way to "fix" it is via well-defined, regulated "out-of-spec"
metrics that the NTU monitors/reports.

> Since future NBN of either political flavour is or will be be carrying voice traffic over IP, formerly carried "out of band", the link layer broadband performance parameters will need to become parameters used to troubleshoot them.?

You would hope so, but a) I didn't see anything particularly with the
FTTH variant at the basic connectivity layer and b) call me skeptical,
but I can't see the incumbent volunteering to hold themselves to a
higher standard given the strength of their current negotiating
position.

With the possibility of wide-spread VDSL deployment I think the matter
is more relevant than it might have been in a mostly fibre world.


Mark.