Google wants your Internet to be faster

Kenny Sallee kenny.sallee at gmail.com
Tue Aug 10 13:05:11 CDT 2010


On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 10:29 AM, Nathan Eisenberg
<nathan at atlasnetworks.us>wrote:

> > Maybe the ISP's should move this choice to the consumer.
>
> The consumer already has this option on many SOHO firewalls.  No action by
> ISPs is required.  But this is totally irrelevant to the idea of Net
> Neutrality.
>
>
Yes - but you can only traffic shape / prioritize so much after the data has
reached your end of a circuit / connection.  So yes those SOHO devices do it
- but if you look on the wire - you'll see more actual bandwidth making it
across then you are expecting.  The SOHO devices are just buffering /
dropping stuff / manipulating TCP flows to slow unimportant stuff down.
 It's a better solution to do this on the provider side



> > I view this exercise as paying for priority when the circuit is full --
> like a special carpool lane.
>
> Carrier circuits should never be 'full', unless your definition of 'full'
> is 50-70%, IMHO.  100% full is a failure of engineering, business planning,
> and monitoring.  Priority shouldn't be required.
>
>
True - but we are not talking about carrier circuits in the core.  Agree
with your statements regarding core carrier circuits.  We are talking about
the 'last mile' DSL/Cable/Fiber connection into your house.  My bandwidth is
pegged everytime I download a new version of Linux from bittorrent.  During
that time - my VoIP and Netflix have issues.


> Best Regards,
> Nathan Eisenberg
>
>



More information about the NANOG mailing list