[182678] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Windows 10 Release
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Alan Buxey)
Wed Jul 29 12:56:29 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <000e01d0ca13$7d9af100$78d0d300$@iname.com>
From: Alan Buxey <A.L.M.Buxey@lboro.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2015 17:54:19 +0100
To: <frnkblk@iname.com>, <nick@flhsi.com>, <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
'QoS problems are to be expected' . Uh?
Don't you put QoS into place just to ensure that the minimum bandwidth you need to ensure critical services (such that your voice traffic is not impeded for example) are NOT affected across your WAN links when there are big globs of data banging around?
Surely, If anything, this is the one case and time when the QoS deployment effort can be shown to have value (obviously the policies would already have been validated against saturated links as part of sign off)
alan
