viperlmw
Premium
join:2005-01-25
 ·Qwest.net
| reply to wentlanc
Re: Engineer vs Agenda
said by wentlanc  :said by telcolackey :In a number of much more technical engineering forums (vs BBR) there is a fair amount of consensus that traffic priority/management of interactive vs non-interactive is the right thing to do in congested situations. How this is done is a different discussion. Can you post links to some of these? I'd be curious to peruse.... Do a search for QOS (for example »A word on QOS and prioritization ) |
|
funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC
·Verizon Online DSL
 ·Skype
| reply to telcolackey
So far today, your inputs have been rather fact free yet I'm the one with the "agenda" naming RFCs and explaining why things are the way that they are and specifically how to move forward.
I'm also offering the fact that it isn't easy and perhaps isn't even practical, but that the right thing to do is to fix it at the standards level before arbitrarily unleashing it on the Internet.
You can call Network Neutrality a religion, but it is no more a religion than Freedom of the Press, is it?
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More fun, more features, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...
|
|
telcolackey
The Truth? You can't handle the truth
join:2007-04-06
Death Valley, CA
| reply to DownTheShore
Perception is reality. Facts don't really mean much.
There are more rights than wrongs on both sides of the debate. Net Neutrality has turned so religious and agenda based that engineering, facts and data mean very little. It is all how the message is spun and which multi-billion dollar business (content companies, ISPs, broadband etc) gets ahead of the cost curve.
--
"Believe only half of what you see and nothing that you hear." - Dinah Craik |
|
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
 ·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME
| reply to wentlanc
You may find it difficult to believe, but the larger the industry, the less 'listening' that is typically performed, and more bullish the management is on promoting a generic service which will maximize revenue.
Eg. Many 'indie' ISPs as well as other institutions will listen to what their customers want, as their customer base is smaller (eg. DSL-Extreme is a good example of this - providing good service, keeping out of the traffic shaping business with a basic no-frills Internet connection).
Larger 'mega corp' tend to dictate policy and direction, as there are many customers (millions) to deal with, and a $1 saving or extra revenue per customer means lots of $$$ in general.
Neither really care about you personally... just that with a smaller company, your voice can be heard. There are a few exceptions to the rule (e.g. current iPhone 3G issues on mega corp AT&T). This comes down to something more like a special interest group.
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
DownTheShore
Maddie Knows Poopie
Premium
join:2003-12-02
Beautiful NJ
clubs:
| reply to telcolackey
said by telcolackey :. Here in BBR there are more end users than engineers so the conversation focuses on more entitlement aspects of broadband vs the technical merits of network management. If you debate the majority, you are called a "fanboy". Many times it is not worth the effort as a few (who I am sure will reply to this) are not worth debating. Interesting that you dismiss any possible responses to your remarks-out-of hand. I suppose, though, that if the people you dismiss as "fanboys" turn out to be right, then that jeopardizes those engineering jobs, so I understand your dilemma.
Isn't the end-user, though, the ultimate arbiter? If it wasn't for us, there'd be no need to worry about the traffic at all. It's well and good to try to figure out a way to manage the system, but if the public perception is that their constitutional rights are being abrogated for the sake of the providers' convenience or to meet some political agenda, then it doesn't matter how pure the "engineers" motives may be - it is the perception of the providers' motives that is going to drive the public's response.
--
Patriotism is not waving a flag, it is living the ideals |
|
funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC
·Verizon Online DSL
·Skype
| reply to telcolackey
said by telcolackey :Network Neutrality means different things to different people. It all depends on your agenda as to how you are presenting it. You're right, but so does the idea of Free Speech. Free Speech means different things to different people, but the concept has a solid well-understood root.
Network Neutrality is rooted in the traditional behavior of the network, which did not treat a packet any differently based on its source, destination, or contents to determine precedence over other packets.
Expand that thought and you get the more famous Network Neutrality principles that one person cannot pay to delay, degrade, or deny the service of someone else.
said by telcolackey :In a number of much more technical engineering forums (vs BBR) there is a fair amount of consensus that traffic priority/management of interactive vs non-interactive is the right thing to do in congested situations. How this is done is a different discussion. It's an important discussion, and it's been had dozens of times, and it comes up often. The IETF keeps coming up with the same answer: the end user (through his applications) can choose the priority however he likes. The ISP has the choice of whether and how much to respect those choices or not, but does not have the choice of imposing its own choices, instead.
RFC 2474 et. al. (covering DSCP) is an example.
The reason is clear -- we can't have 100 different versions of how the Internet works and expect applications to interoperate in that environment.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More fun, more features, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...
|
|
wentlanc
You Can't Fix Dumb..
join:2003-07-30
Maineville, OH
| reply to telcolackey
said by telcolackey :In a number of much more technical engineering forums (vs BBR) there is a fair amount of consensus that traffic priority/management of interactive vs non-interactive is the right thing to do in congested situations. How this is done is a different discussion. Can you post links to some of these? I'd be curious to peruse....
said by telcolackey :Here in BBR there are more end users than engineers so the conversation focuses on more entitlement aspects of broadband vs the technical merits of network management. If you debate the majority, you are called a "fanboy". Many times it is not worth the effort as a few (who I am sure will reply to this) are not worth debating. People are posting their opinions in a public forum. At my work, we call this Voice of the Customer. It's worth listening to if you are in business to provide service to customers.
cw |
|
telcolackey
The Truth? You can't handle the truth
join:2007-04-06
Death Valley, CA
1 edit | Network Neutrality means different things to different people. It all depends on your agenda as to how you are presenting it.
In a number of much more technical engineering forums (vs BBR) there is a fair amount of consensus that traffic priority/management of interactive vs non-interactive is the right thing to do in congested situations. How this is done is a different discussion.
Here in BBR there are more end users than engineers so the conversation focuses on more entitlement aspects of broadband vs the technical merits of network management. If you debate the majority, you are called a "fanboy". Many times it is not worth the effort as a few (who I am sure will reply to this) are not worth debating.
--
"Believe only half of what you see and nothing that you hear." - Dinah Craik |
|
