Re: "Network Neutrality" or "Open Internet"

["Fergie" <fergdawg () netzero net>]

Correction:

That should read 'loss' not 'error-correction' with
regards to TCP. My bad. :-)

- ferg



-- "Fergie" <fergdawg () netzero net> wrote:

Right, exactly.

Further: Remember that TCP/UDP (et. al.) is a all about packets, and
as such, is designed as a best effort delivery service (retransmission
and error-detection built into TCP itself, UDP relying on the various
associated applications, etc).

Better than best effort? No such thing, not in The Internet.

Worse than best effort? Bingo.

- ferg


-- Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu wrote:

On Sat, 15 Apr 2006 00:11:17 MDT, Dude VanWinkle said:

> Also, is the degradation of services happening on the Client side, the
> Provider side, or both?

What QoS *really* means:  "If we underengineered our backbone and can't 
carry
everybody's packet, we throw away packets from the people who paid us the 
least".

Alternatively:

"Preferential treatment can degrade service, but it cannot improve 
service."
                        -- <Michael.Dillon () btradianz com>


--
"Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson
 Engineering Architecture for the Internet
 fergdawg () netzero net or fergdawg () sbcglobal net
 ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/



_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.


_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.