FTC: All's Well in Broadband Land > I buy a pipe...

said by RJ44:

That's exactly what I said.

said by bmn:

Right, but if you read on, you would see why I reiterated the point... Why the push for QoS unless the providers are pushing their networks too far ? And if they are pushing their networks too far, that definitely should make business customers think twice about using them.

said by RJ44:

It's very simple. Because "stuff" happens to the best of networks. And if I'm offering real-time services, I want them to stay real-time even when a fiber gets cut or a router goes down or something causes everyone in the country to jump on their pc at the same time...and I'm willing to pay for that security.

said by bmn:

QoS will not fix routers flapping or fibre cuts. Those situations are solved by properly configured routing protocols.

said by RJ44:

Are you intentionally missing the point? Because if so I will be glad to stop discussing the issue. If not, please back up and read my post again. I think it's pretty clear.

said by bmn:

Are you missing the glaring obvious point that I've made. You are overestimating the ability of what QoS can actually do for a network.

I'm sorry you can't take being corrected due to your unfamiliarity with QoS, but seriously...

I KNOW the point of QoS on a network and I'm quite familiar with the ins and outs of QoS... However, you are clearly missing the point that QoS is limited in what it can actually provide.

said by RJ44:

And you, with your great knowledge, repeated my statement that QoS only makes a difference in situations when a network is congested. Except the way you said it you thought you were correcting me.

Then I listed a few of situations that can cause congested networks for you, since you asked, and you completely missed the point. And now you're lecturing me because you think *I* don't know what I'm talking about?

Make up your mind. Either way, I'm done talking to a closed door.