 funchordsHelloPremium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:5 | reply to espaeth
Re: Slight clarification / correction said by espaeth:said by funchords:How do you figure? Putting a quota on a DSCP means that it reverts to default behavior if the quota is passed. The ISP never has to look at application/protocol. Only the users that configure their applications to set DSCP values will benefit from such an implementation. Even with per-connection quotas, it's a pretty safe assumption that a minority of end-users will have applications that will mark traffic. It's also a pretty safe bet that P2P apps will be disproportionately represented in that group. As I said -- if Comcast (or AT&T) were to do it, I think the entire world would follow.
Actually, I predict the VOIP and gaming apps would be the first to rush to take advantage of such a thing, while P2P file-sharing apps themselves would either opt for best-effort or less-than-best-effort (a lower-priority bulk class, if such were made available).
I'll say that again, I don't think there is any interest among the community of P2P developers to harm the network. They know that an efficient network works better for them.
Sure -- It's predictable that hacks and mods would come out that tried to exploit faster markings, which is why I think they should be quota'd by the ISPs (actually, I think Brutus the Enforcer should pay the snot a personal visit, but that's just me). An ISP can quota a VOIP/Gaming DSCP to 3x-5x the width of the loosest of the VOIP codecs and still avoid making cheating at all attractive to a P2P user.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon -- KJ7RL
What you do at Christmas does not matter so much; What counts are the Christmas things you do all year through. |
