VoIP Quality Declining > Sounds like the VOIP results make a case for 2-Tier internet

Sounds like the VOIP results make a case for 2-Tier internet

reply to fAcEtIOUs

Can we cut the conspiracy what if nonsense. There will always be issues to address and whether it is hacked easily is a moot point. Cable modems used to be hacked easily they are still around. TK you are correct, but I don't think it should be prioritized because then you discriminate which packets are more important. Everyone should just have a dedicated piece of the pipe however small where there packets are absolute in terms of prioritization and when you sign up for a service you indicate which packets you want prioritized. This would preserve the current model of the internet, while allowing some people to prioritize their packets. In other words 100 people sharing 100 mbits would each have 1 mbit dedicated even though they each get 20 mbit connections. This way everyone is happy. They could charge for this prioritization service much like they charge for premium phone line features. Sure there is room for telco corruption, but I think that unethical business practices would be flushed out. What I am saying is though that everyone should have some dedicated minimum amount of the pipe at which point you could pay for the telco to prioritize certain packets that way you wouldn't have to do it yourself.

reply to fAcEtIOUs
Looks like your wet dream (a marketing whore in geek clothing) has finally found the light of day. This doesn't look like anything but what it is - a shoddy ILEC making excuses.

reply to grandpinaple

reply to fAcEtIOUs
How exactly would we go about saying that someone's gaming for entertainment is more important then someone else's streaming videoconference for a business. As soon as you start saying some application is more important then another, you open up a big can of worms.
--
Quis custodiet custodes ipsos?

reply to microserf
How about instead of just making claims you actually warrant them. My analogy was fine. Your router can only prioritize packets as they leave your network not what happens when they leave the telcos network that is what I am talking about. Your connection speed isn't guarenteed. It is for all intents and purposes a burstable pipe, thus there needs to be a guarenteed minimum. It isn't about upgrades because it is wasteful, stupid, and expensive to the consumer to have them maintain 100% capacity all the time when only half gets used. When the pipe gets big enough I no longer require any sort of dedicated connection because with that in mind the bare minimum increases. If I can get a 100Mbps burst when I need to download a large file I am fine with that. For my against the TOS home server a guarenteed minimum of 5 Mbps will due. I am referencing next generation networks here not the present pipes because net neutrality doesn't involve them as things currently stand. I do believe that when BS and Whiteacre first made their comments they had much more greedy intentions in mind. After seeing all the backlash they lowered it to an idea most users would actually want. Don't intepret these companies retarded comments as what their actual agendas are. Unlike most people I see here businessmen have tact and need to excersise that tact to keep the company running. That says absolutely nothing about their actions. A year ago AT&T was claiming 6 Mbps is enough, now they are already considering ways to get past that with engineers question the present state of lightspeed. Think about it, do you on a daily basis go out and say everything sucks and we are gonna get fucked by someone, clearly no. When you buy something crappy at a bargain basement price you rejoice at the deal you got as well. Well I don't expect CEOs to make doomsday forecasts about their companies nor do I expect them to bash the products they sell. Yes Verizon's plan of instant gratification is nicer, but it is also probably going to be much much slower. AT&T is also being more innovative and challenging the present legal structure surrounding cable TV.