openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | reply to MaynardKrebs
Re: Common carrier utility But with a "net-neutral last mile", how does one get QoS and sufficient uptime? |
|
Lazlow
join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO | Net-neutrality only applies to VOIP that runs over the internet, not the stuff that runs on private networks(CC,Charter, etc). |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | I realize that. So what am I missing from MaynardKrebs  ' post? |
|
Lazlow
join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO
1 edit | openbox9
Edit: need to be awake before I post. |
|
| reply to openbox9
said by openbox9:But with a "net-neutral last mile", how does one get QoS and sufficient uptime? One gets it just as they get it now in any other non monopolistic / duopoly service - competition.
With VOIP, you can use any provider anywhere. If one is not meeting your needs you go to another. That is the beauty in competition, it actually makes companies provide a good product and service to stay viable.
Just because you don't allow them to make packets a priority (which is ONLY needed on a congested network) does not mean quality will suffer. If you have to implement QoS on any packet, then you are simply stating your network is not up to handling the amount of traffic on it and thus you should reduce the number of users you are servicing through either higher prices or some other anti-consumer mechanism that will cause your customers to go elsewhere. Choice is your - Upgrade the network or reduce you customer base. |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | said by Skippy25:One gets it just as they get it now in any other non monopolistic / duopoly service - competition. How many competitive services really need QoS? And how many other "non-monopolistic/duopolistic" services have had their QoS issues solved by competition? I'm guessing the answers are pretty close to zero.said by Skippy25:With VOIP, you can use any provider anywhere. If one is not meeting your needs you go to another. That is the beauty in competition, it actually makes companies provide a good product and service to stay viable. You have that now. Besides, that's really not what this discussion is about.said by Skippy25:Just because you don't allow them to make packets a priority (which is ONLY needed on a congested network) does not mean quality will suffer. If you have to implement QoS on any packet, then you are simply stating your network is not up to handling the amount of traffic on it and thus you should reduce the number of users you are servicing through either higher prices or some other anti-consumer mechanism that will cause your customers to go elsewhere. Choice is your - Upgrade the network or reduce you customer base. You do realize that QoS exists on the PSTN now. It even exists for mobile phones, especially for emergency responders when the unfortunate happens. Networks, whether packet or circuit switched, simply can't/won't be built to handle major catastrophic situations where everyone jumps on their voice connections. QoS is critical. |
|
|
|
