North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
RE: Is anyone actually USING IP QoS?
At 14:04 17/05/99 -0700, Steve Riley (MCS) wrote: You are merely showing your geocentricism by saying that bandwidth is essentially free. That may be true in the USA but not in other countries and especially not trans-Pacific or trans-Atlantic. T3 from NY-Chicago goes for around $20K/month. T3 from London to NY goes for around $100K/month. T3 from Tel-Aviv to NY goes for around $300K/month. T3 Tokyo-LA goes for $400K/month (all prices for fiber on a one year contract). I would agree that at $20K/month you could build possible business models that turn the cost of the b/w to be part of the costs you eat and in turn provide b/w free of charge to your users. But at $300-$400K/month it ain't gonna work ($20K/month gets one an almost E1 from Europe to the USA - whereas in the USA it gets you a T3). Go to www.band-x.com to see what current circuits cost. Once int'l bandwidth costs drop to the rates of USA national rates, then I would be inclined to agree with you and Vadim that QoS is not needed. Clearly today, IP QoS is not needed at the campus level. -Hank > >Nice to see that I'm not the only one believing in the foolishness of QoS >hype. Bandwidth is essentially free, and will always be cheaper than QoS. >And since in the end nearly all decisions are based on economics, it should >be apparent which is the more logical decision. > >Allow me to point you to an interesting paper called "Rise of the Stupid >Network." Many of you here may have already seen this. It was written back >in 1997 by David Isenberg, then a reasearcher at AT&T Labs (Isenberg is now >an independent consultant). His paper profoundly changed my views on QoS and >made me realize that networks perform best when we limit how smart they get >and ensure that networks focus on transport only. I urge everyone to read >it. > >Paper: http://www.rageboy.com/stupidnet.html >Isenberg's site: http://www.isen.com/ > >_________________________________________________________ >Steve Riley >Microsoft Telecommunications Practice in Denver, Colorado > email: mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org > call: +1 303 521-4129 (cellular) > page: +1 888 440-6249 or mailto:email@example.com >Applying computer technology is simply finding the right wrench to pound in >the correct screw. > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Vadim Antonov [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] >Sent: Monday, May 17, 1999 12:28 PM >To: email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org >Subject: Re: Is anyone actually USING IP QoS? > > >Yep. Altough not _all_ QoS schemes are broken-as-designed. The >most trivial per-packet priority combined with ingress >priority mix shaping works. Ths idea of end-to-end >whatever reservations or guarantees is usually propounded >by people who either neglected their CS courses or those >who are trying to sell it. > >Yep. The biggest QoS secret is that nobody actually needs >it. Bandwidth is cheap and is growing cheaper. The >manpower needed to deploy and maintain QoS is getting >more and more expensive. > >--vadim > >