Search:  

 
 
   All ForumsHot TopicsGallery






how-to block ads


 
Forums » FCC Identifies, Fines VoIP Blocker » I don't get this:
Search Topic:
Share Topic:
RSS topic:
toggle:
flat / full
normal / watch
Post a:
Post a:
Fine? What fine? »
« Acted quick  
AuthorAll Replies


ColdFiltered

join:2005-01-25
Atlanta, GA

reply to DaSneaky1D
Re: I don't get this:

Example:

An Earthlink DSL subscriber in Atlanta will more commonly be found on BellSouth Telecommunications local WAN. This means that between the DSL modem and the Earthlink gateway (into their network) its riding Bellsouth ATM core. Those cores are setup for UBR and no differential treatment on the packets traveling with those tunnels/routes between the subscriber and ISP.

Additionally, the tariff service is for Bellsouth acting as a wholesalers to ISPs, and that tariff is based on UBR. You can classify layer three packets to contain priority, but on layer two they will be treated just like any other ATM packet, including ATM-carried packets that may have layer three qualities much lower.

And example within an example:

Two customers riding the same ILEC ATM core that is necessary between the two subscribers and their respective ISPs. One ISP sets up VoIP to have higher priority Layer-3 traffic than all other services. The other ISP doesn't offer VoIP and doesn't really care about Layer-3 priorities (QoS).

Now, on the LEC's ATM core the only thing that matters IN SOME CASES is the distinguishment of QoS on Layer-2 and both these customers are treated identically in this case. So, the second subscriber's porn, music, gaming, email, etc. traffic is treated more more or less important as the first subscriber's VoIP phone service.

In order to guarantee voice packets priority over all other forms of traffic this needs to be address on network segments that the ISPs do not control. This is where the much fear ILEC-offered VoIP will come into big play. This will be done through the use of a different network topology on both Layer-2 and 3 that will afford wholesale prioritization of packets. But who says that ILEC has to resell on that topology? No one.


DaSneaky1D
one wall to block them all
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
The Lou
Ah, ok. You are absolutely right.


Corvus
Flaming Tards Since 2003
Premium,VIP
join:2003-11-26
reply to ColdFiltered
Are you saying that the FCC could force the ISP to use QOS for all the customers using third party VoIP?
Forums » FCC Identifies, Fines VoIP BlockerFine? What fine? »
« Acted quick  


Monday, 09-Nov 23:32:39 Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo | feedback | contact
over 10 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com.republican-creole
page compression OFF
Most commented news this week
· [80] VoIP Over 3G Still Not Working For iPhone
· [75] Verizon Keeps Swinging At AT&T
· [33] Bill Would Force ISPs To Block Financial Scams
· [21] Mediacom Hints At 50, 100 Mbps Speeds
· [13] Clearwire To Get Another $1.5 Billion
· [10] Monday Morning Links
· [9] 15 States Have Now Gotten Broadband Mapping Money
· [5] AT&T Launching New 7.2 Mbps 3G Modem
Most people now reading
· 3.x Feral Druid - Bear Tanking Guide [World of Warcraft]
· 60 Minutes piece on cyber security last night [Security]
· Google Has Acquired Gizmo5 [VOIP Tech Chat]
· [SU] Apple Releases Mac OS X 10.6.2 [All Things Macintosh]
· Know when to run! [Home Repair & Improvement]
· Windows 7 boot manager editing questions [Microsoft Help]
· Framed for child porn 151; by a PC virus [Security]
· Blown out Ballasts [Home Repair & Improvement]
· [WIN7] Which Services in Win 7 Have You Turned Off? [Microsoft Help]
· Massive Slowdowns? [cover,1584]