1 edit | reply to djrobx
Re: I can see both sides here... said by djrobx:There is a simple solution to the 3rd party VoIP situation. When I use such an application, I am connecting with a Server run by the VoIP Provider. Thus Comcast KNOWS that this is a VoIP Session and can serve it over the same channel as they use for THEIR CDV service.
Nope, sorry, that would be treating VOIP differently than other internet traffic, which is against net neutrality principles. There seems to be a lot of definitions of network neutrality. I am of the type that net neutrality is not allowing bribes or holding certain networks hostage or at a degraded speed (yes, you can down mod me... that's just my definition of what appears to be a lot of differing definitions/opinions out there on net neutrality, though mine is probably closer to the original intention of net neutrality). Because of the fact that VoIP and IPTV are extremely latency and packet loss sensitive, I don't have a problem with prioritizing it over data services which are mostly for bulk and do not require even latency or packet loss. As long as everyone's VoIP and IPTV are prioritized evenly (not one provider over another), of course, as I mentioned earlier, I'm sure some may use a proprietary solution which may not get prioritized... inviting more problems.
This makes theory sense otherwise everything would have to be extremely overbuilt, because as peak hour comes around, your (maybe very important 911) call or video may stutter or drop completely (in the case of VoIP) as a link approaches capacity.
--
What happens when you combine common sense and an outspoken personality? |
