[79235] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Vonage Hits ISP Resistance
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jay R. Ashworth)
Fri Apr 1 11:42:52 2005
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 11:42:25 -0500
From: "Jay R. Ashworth" <jra@baylink.com>
To: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0503301658330.30763@bacchus.billn.net>; from Bill Nash <billn@billn.net> on Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 05:06:00PM -0800
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 05:06:00PM -0800, Bill Nash wrote:
> I find this to be entertaining, since as a VOIP consumer, I'm reimbursing
> my ISP for the cost of the traffic as part of my monthly tithe. Why
> exactly are networks taking this stance to QoS VOIP traffic, generated by
> their customers, into uselessness?
Oh, c'mon, Bill; you *know* why. :-)
This goes back to when I ran a Teeny Tiny<tm> ISP in '95 on a 256K DSL
link and 40 modems, and got massacred by iPhone:
The carriers based their provisioning, and thus pricing, on a traffic
engineering model that was reasonable *until the Big New Application
became a runaway hit*.
You're not paying (at least at the lower levels of the food chain) for
what you *could* utilize, you're paying for what you're likely to
utilize, *given what the people who set the pricing knew at the time*.
Pricing depends on oversubscription; safe oversubscription depends on
having a pretty decent handle on the traffic patterns, at the macro
level.
Cheers,
-- jra
--
Jay R. Ashworth jra@baylink.com
Designer Baylink RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates The Things I Think '87 e24
St Petersburg FL USA http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274
If you can read this... thank a system administrator. Or two. --me
