The Unix Heritage Society mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: ggm@algebras.org (George Michaelson)
Subject: [TUHS] V7 Addendem [ really lawyers and AT&T consent decree ]
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2017 11:42:58 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAKr6gn2B9yCMrHK2ws-4PiG4+0v81Ot5U6wri8BHKXkYrzLRnA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171212012835.B290518C08C@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>

I don't think this list is the right place to conduct that particular
debate. Its true RSVP didn't get traction, but the economics which
underpin it are pretty bad, for the current Internet model of
settlement and 'who pays, and when' -There was no point at which RSVP
was going to deploy into the inter-carrier settlement regime we have,
and have had for some time. It didn't actually mean buying 'more' of
anything, it simply meant pushing people who wouldn't buy more, into
smaller drop buckets.

I'd counter (sort of) with a comment that I heard at NANOG San Jose
from a US tier-1. There is more glass in the ground, than lit, by at
least one order of magnitude. If you have congestion on any US
domestic link, its not because you don't actually have clear channel,
its because somebody is making money from artificial scarcity.

I don't know for sure that the same is true trans-atlantic or
trans-pacific, but it would not surprise me if there is a lot of unlit
capacity, and more dropped packets than strictly speaking the glass
expects.

n-way conferencing is about as stressful as it gets for loss, and
delay. I think its a minor miracle I can do 3 or 4 way, heads and
voice at all. If I was paying, I'd expect better. Free QDU's are like
greshams law: bad (cheap) comms drives out good (paid) comms.

-G

On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Noel Chiappa <jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu> wrote:
>     > From: Steve Johnson
>
>     > Recently I've been attempting to Skype on a group call with 5 people in
>     > Europe. I would LOVE to have a guaranteed bandwidth for my call.
>
> The Internet engineering community did quite a bit of work on resource
> guarantees. (Google 'IntServ' and 'RSVP' - the latter is the control
> protocol.)
>
> Unfortunately, there was never much interest in it. People started doing
> voice with just plain 'best effort' service, and I guess it worked 'well
> enough' that nobody was interested in IntServ/RSVP.
>
>         Noel


  reply	other threads:[~2017-12-12  1:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-12-12  1:28 Noel Chiappa
2017-12-12  1:42 ` George Michaelson [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2017-12-12 13:59 Noel Chiappa
2017-12-12  2:04 Noel Chiappa
2017-12-12  2:17 ` George Michaelson
2017-12-11 19:23 Noel Chiappa
2017-12-12 16:04 ` Random832
2017-12-06  0:33 [TUHS] V7 Addendem Warner Losh
2017-12-06  1:07 ` Warren Toomey
2017-12-06 16:11   ` Random832
2017-12-06 16:15     ` Jon Steinhart
2017-12-06 18:39       ` Clem Cole
2017-12-06 18:49         ` [TUHS] V7 Addendem [ really lawyers and AT&T consent decree ] Jon Steinhart
2017-12-06 18:53           ` Warner Losh
2017-12-06 18:58             ` Jon Steinhart
2017-12-06 18:54           ` Clem Cole
2017-12-06 19:20             ` William Pechter
2017-12-07 14:26               ` Ron Natalie
2017-12-06 19:23           ` William Corcoran
2017-12-06 20:30             ` Kurt H Maier
2017-12-06 23:59               ` George Michaelson
2017-12-07 14:03               ` Ron Natalie
2017-12-07 15:34                 ` William Corcoran
2017-12-07  5:08             ` Jon Steinhart
2017-12-07 15:09               ` Larry McVoy
2017-12-11 18:17           ` Paul Winalski
2017-12-11 18:39             ` Clem Cole
2017-12-12  0:27               ` Steve Johnson
2017-12-13 17:09                 ` Jason Stevens
2017-12-13 17:05               ` Jason Stevens
2017-12-11 20:11             ` William Cheswick
2017-12-11 23:26               ` Arthur Krewat

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CAKr6gn2B9yCMrHK2ws-4PiG4+0v81Ot5U6wri8BHKXkYrzLRnA@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=ggm@algebras.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).