QOS or more bandwidth
kawaii_iinazuke at hotmail.com
Tue May 29 13:54:32 UTC 2001
The problem is, while most vendors support tagging and priority queuing, non
of the current vendors can support true end to end QoS. Instead, we have
taken to calling their options CoS.
The problem that I have seen is that while you can make certain that a good
effort is made to ensure that your high proirity traffic is transmitted
before your best effort traffic, you have no real way to ensure that the
high priority arrives at the destination in the same manner that it was
transmitted. I'm talking about packet order, jitter, and latency. Sure, it
will probably get there, but will the data still be worth anything.
For Internet traffic, QoS/CoS is probably not worth it, as there is no way
to realistically do either across two or more network providers. The real
need will be on single provider wishing to sell more than just Internet
across their expensive backbone. Such applications will be Toll-quality
voice, production/broadcast-quality video, VPN, etc.
The way I have seen it, either IP QoS will have to become a reality, or the
applications themselves will need to change to handle the poor CoS
substitute that is offered now.
Opinions in this email are the personal opinions of the author and are not
associated with author's employer. This email account is a not the regular
email account of the author and is being used for the protection of the
--- Original Message ---
Most competitive vendors now provide native and upgrade provisions for QoS
in one form or another. The problems most often encountered revolve around
multi-vendor cos/qos feature implementation incompatibilities. The "least
common denominator features" that are needed for basic interworking usually
do not extend to 'differentiating' features that vendors like to hold close
to the vest, such as prioritization and cos/qos features. Not without much
grief, in any event. It forces one to seriously consider single vendor
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
More information about the NANOG