new thread: QoS, latency, bandwidth and the FCC/net neutrality debate

[Michael Butash]

Most network devices these days, including wireless, firewalls, as well as
you standard routers and switches tend to do layer 4 and up application
inspection, primarily for creating policies like "limit youtube|netflix to
1mbps", "block peer to peer traffic", and "limit google to safe search
only" that muck with your content when at work, school, anywhere you have
an network admin like Herminio or I trying to keep users from doing things
to break the network, or at least them all at once doing so.

Early on, Netflix and Youtube grew to be behemoth network hogs for
providers, so rather than let storming elephants trample the village, they
would "queue" that traffic so it wouldn't overrun more important things,
like normal web browsing and more perceptible use cases (still likely do).
As Stephen said, they eventually got smarter, or Netflix did, to peer
directly with the mega providers, and put local content distribution nodes
directly into them on 100gb switches so they didn't have to slaughter your
traffic (and take the bad press eventually in being the internet cop ala
comcast).

Is this really what the net neutrality debate is about anymore?  No,
politicians don't care about internet speeds, it's really about media
consolidation occurring that you will be pretty much left with att,
comcast, and news corp for all television, internet, phone, and news in
general.  What could go wrong, other than enabling maniacal billionaires to
buy their way into the white house.

-mb


On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 1:16 PM, Herminio Hernandez Jr. <
herminio.hernandezjr at gmail.com> wrote:

> They are very related Network QoS exists because there are limits in how
> much networking gear transmits packets and frames. There is a lot more to
> it than just writing the policy. There is a cost to engineer that out.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Nov 24, 2017, at 12:59 PM, Stephen Partington <cryptworks at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> It is not that simple in my mind. Network QoS is very different then the
> possibility of the customers pay extra for additional services.
>
> Besides Netflix has cache devices that can and are frequently in local is
> Datacenters to alleviate latency and Bw issues.
>
> And given the current fcc chairs attitude I am really skeptical.
>
> On Nov 24, 2017 12:31 PM, "Herminio Hernandez, Jr." <
> herminio.hernandezjr at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I will start with some thoughts on why I find the NN debate troubling.
>> First there is a technical misunderstanding. NN is built on the idea that
>> ISPs should treat all traffic equally. This concept is simply unrealistic.
>> Bandwidth is a limited resource there is only so much data that a Ethernet
>> port can transmit and receive. Also things like MTU size, latency, jitter
>> all impact the reliable transmission of data which bring me to my other
>> point. Not all traffic is the same. There are night and day differences
>> between TCP and UDP traffic. For example UDP (which is what most voice and
>> video is) is faster than TCP. The drawback to this is that UDP does not
>> have the recovery features that TCP has in case of packet loss (ie sequence
>> number and acknowledgment packets). There UDP applications are more prone
>> to suffer when latency is high or links get saturated. To overcome this
>> network engineer implement prioritization and traffic shaping to ensure
>> these services are not impacted.
>>
>> As more content is consumed such as 4K video on the internet, the need
>> for traffic shaping will only increase. Netflix already has the ability to
>> push 100Gbps from their servers. That is a ton of data that needs to be
>> prioritized by ISPs. This is not free there are serious costs involved in
>> man hours and infrastructure. Someone needs to bear that cost. This is why
>> I am not opposed to fast lanes. If Netflix is going to have ISPs ensure all
>> of the massive amounts to data are push is delivered efficiently, then the
>> ISPs should be free to charge a premium for this service. Netflix does not
>> want to bear this cost, hense their support for Net Neutrality. They want
>> the ISPs to bear the cost, but then result of that is we bear the cost via
>> data caps.
>>
>> When you strip away all the slogans it all comes down to money and
>> control. Data will be traffic shaped it is just who decides how unelected
>> government bureaucrats pushing some public policy or market forces.
>>
>> Something else to consider a lot not all but a lot of the very same
>> people who cry that the end of Net Neutrality will be end of free speech
>> (no more free and open internet) have no issue saying Twiiter, Facebook,
>> and Google (since they are 'private companies') have the right demonetize,
>> obscure, or even ban individuals who express ideas that other deem
>> "offensive". How is that promoting a "Free and Open Internet"?
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 10:24 AM, Eric Oyen <eric.oyen at icloud.com> wrote:
>>
>>> well, as someone else suggested, a new thread.
>>>
>>> so, shall we start the discussion?
>>>
>>> ok, as mentioned, bandwidth is a limited resource. the question is How
>>> limited?
>>>
>>> Then there is the question: can an ISP curtail certain types of traffic
>>> (null route it, delay it, other bandwidth shaping routines)? How far can
>>> they go?
>>>
>>> What really is net neutrality?
>>>
>>> lastly, what part does the FCC play, or should they?
>>>
>>> so, any thoughts on the above questions?
>>>
>>> -eric
>>> from the central offices of the Technomage Guild, you got questions, we
>>> got answers Dept.
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss at lists.phxlinux.org
>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------
>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss at lists.phxlinux.org
>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>
> ---------------------------------------------------
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss at lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss at lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.phxlinux.org/pipermail/plug-discuss/attachments/20171125/9f69be3d/attachment.html>