[27676] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Napster and others...
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (smd@clock.org)
Tue Mar 7 12:48:45 2000
From: smd@clock.org
To: michael@napster.com, nanog@merit.edu
Message-Id: <20000307174516Z947-3570+9@cesium.clock.org>
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 09:45:08 -0800
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
| What would be your suggestions on making Napster a more network
| friendly app?
1. RFC 2001 compliance.
Keep it TCP.
2. Although RFC 1349 is supposedly dead and the TOS octet in the
RFC 791 scheme is dead too[*], it is at least good politics to
set a low TOS value on the bulk transfer traffic. (If not on all traffic).
Thus, routers configured to do TOS-based fancy queueing will DTRT and
fewer people will accuse Napster of being a resource pig.
3. "If we aren't network friendly, please let us know what will make
us more network friendly" is a great attitude to demonstrate. Hopefully
this will be appreciated by actual operators (at least the ones who
don't pay per-packet/per-byte charges).
Sean.
[*] RFC 2474/RFC 2475 but don't hold your breath -:)
Who implements this could be a NANOG topic. -:) -:)
