RE: Is anyone actually USING IP QoS?

[Hank Nussbacher <hank () ibm net il>]

At 14:04 17/05/99 -0700, Steve Riley (MCS) wrote:

You are merely showing your geocentricism by saying that bandwidth is
essentially free.  That may be true in the USA but not in other countries
and especially not trans-Pacific or trans-Atlantic.  T3 from NY-Chicago
goes for around $20K/month.  T3 from London to NY goes for around
$100K/month.  T3 from Tel-Aviv to NY goes for around $300K/month.  T3
Tokyo-LA goes for $400K/month (all prices for fiber on a one year
contract).  I would agree that at $20K/month you could build possible
business models that turn the cost of the b/w to be part of the costs you
eat and in turn provide b/w free of charge to your users.  

But at $300-$400K/month it ain't gonna work ($20K/month gets one an almost
E1 from Europe to the USA - whereas in the USA it gets you a T3).  Go to
www.band-x.com to see what current circuits cost.

Once int'l bandwidth costs drop to the rates of USA national rates, then I
would be inclined to agree with you and Vadim that QoS is not needed.
Clearly today, IP QoS is not needed at the campus level.

-Hank

> Nice to see that I'm not the only one believing in the foolishness of QoS
> hype. Bandwidth is essentially free, and will always be cheaper than QoS.
> And since in the end nearly all decisions are based on economics, it should
> be apparent which is the more logical decision.
>
> Allow me to point you to an interesting paper called "Rise of the Stupid
> Network." Many of you here may have already seen this. It was written back
> in 1997 by David Isenberg, then a reasearcher at AT&T Labs (Isenberg is now
> an independent consultant). His paper profoundly changed my views on QoS and
> made me realize that networks perform best when we limit how smart they get
> and ensure that networks focus on transport only. I urge everyone to read
> it.
>
> Paper: http://www.rageboy.com/stupidnet.html
> Isenberg's site: http://www.isen.com/
>
> _________________________________________________________
> Steve Riley
> Microsoft Telecommunications Practice in Denver, Colorado
>    email: mailto:steriley () microsoft com
>    call: +1 303 521-4129 (cellular)
>    page: +1 888 440-6249 or mailto:4406249 () skytel com
> Applying computer technology is simply finding the right wrench to pound in
> the correct screw.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vadim Antonov [mailto:avg () kotovnik com]
> Sent: Monday, May 17, 1999 12:28 PM
> To: nanog () merit edu; pete () kruckenberg com
> Subject: Re: Is anyone actually USING IP QoS?
>
>
> Yep.  Altough not _all_ QoS schemes are broken-as-designed.  The
> most trivial per-packet priority combined with ingress
> priority mix shaping works.  Ths idea of end-to-end
> whatever reservations or guarantees is usually propounded
> by people who either neglected their CS courses or those
> who are trying to sell it.
>
> Yep.  The biggest QoS secret is that nobody actually needs
> it.  Bandwidth is cheap and is growing cheaper.  The
> manpower needed to deploy and maintain QoS is getting
> more and more expensive.
>
> --vadim