Is anyone actually USING IP QoS?
hank at ibm.net.il
Tue May 18 06:29:07 UTC 1999
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.
>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
>Isenberg's site: http://www.isen.com/
>Microsoft Telecommunications Practice in Denver, Colorado
> email: mailto:steriley at microsoft.com
> call: +1 303 521-4129 (cellular)
> page: +1 888 440-6249 or mailto:4406249 at skytel.com
>Applying computer technology is simply finding the right wrench to pound in
>the correct screw.
>From: Vadim Antonov [mailto:avg at kotovnik.com]
>Sent: Monday, May 17, 1999 12:28 PM
>To: nanog at merit.edu; pete at kruckenberg.com
>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.
More information about the NANOG