[38096] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: QOS or more bandwidth
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (E.B. Dreger)
Tue May 29 09:34:41 2001
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 13:28:38 +0000 (GMT)
From: "E.B. Dreger" <eddy+public+spam@noc.everquick.net>
To: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0105291410470.32761-100000@staff.opaltelecom.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.20.0105291321130.17020-100000@www.everquick.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
> Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 14:13:50 +0100 (BST)
> From: Stephen J. Wilcox <steve@opaltelecom.co.uk>
>
> Altho you need to have different policies for your core and for your
> customers.. it may be practical to increase bandwidth on the core and
> avoid QoS (which imho should never be employed on the core).. but its
> not always within a customers budget to upgrade from low speed circuits.
Although I generally agree, how does one keep QoS out of the core for CBR
and jitter-sensitive applications?
> I think as the prices drop, smaller businesses are coming online but
> still trying to use high bandwidth applications. As they are unable to
Many here must continually explain on other lists that speed and volume
are totally different games. "High-speed" access != "high volume for
below cost". Ughh. (If I wire my house with a 400A main, and insist
on running 30kW all the time, I'm going to get a biiig electric bill...)
Eddy
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brotsman & Dreger, Inc.
EverQuick Internet Division
Phone: (316) 794-8922
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 11:23:58 +0000 (GMT)
From: A Trap <blacklist@brics.com>
To: blacklist@brics.com
Subject: Please ignore this portion of my mail signature.
These last few lines are a trap for address-harvesting spambots. Do NOT
send mail to <blacklist@brics.com>, or you are likely to be blocked.
