nanog mailing list archives
RE: QOS or more bandwidth
From: RJ Atkinson <rja () inet org>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 13:22:17 -0400
At 10:15 29/05/01, Irwin Lazar wrote:
FWIW, I recently heard someone ask the question - "how do you go to your investors and tell them you need more money for more bandwidth because you don't want to efficiently manage your existing capacity?" This is the business case for QoS, IMHO.
Whenever I did the cost of deploying and managing fancy QoS and compared it with the cost of getting and managing more capacity, it was always MUCH MUCH cheaper to get and manage more capacity than to mess with more QoS. Other folks mileage might vary. I'd encourage folks in that situation to fire up a spreadsheet and do the math. The critical variable in my cases was accounting properly for the increased ongoing operational costs of maintaining a QoS-enabled network. Those turned out to be quite high. Ran rja () inet org
Current thread:
- Re: QOS or more bandwidth, (continued)
- Re: QOS or more bandwidth Stephen J. Wilcox (May 29)
- Re: QOS or more bandwidth Pete Kruckenberg (May 29)
- RE: QOS or more bandwidth Frank Coluccio (May 29)
- RE: QOS or more bandwidth Ukyo Kuonji (May 29)
- RE: QOS or more bandwidth Pete Kruckenberg (May 29)
- Re: QOS or more bandwidth Sean M. Doran (May 29)
- Re: QOS or more bandwidth RJ Atkinson (May 29)
- RE: QOS or more bandwidth Sean M. Doran (May 29)
- RE: QOS or more bandwidth Irwin Lazar (May 29)
- Re: QOS or more bandwidth bmanning (May 29)
- RE: QOS or more bandwidth RJ Atkinson (May 29)
- RE: QOS or more bandwidth Bill Woodcock (May 29)
- RE: QOS or more bandwidth Eric Whitehill (May 29)
- RE: QOS or more bandwidth Greg Maxwell (May 29)
- Re: QOS or more bandwidth Glen Turner (May 31)
- RE: QOS or more bandwidth Pete Kruckenberg (May 29)
- More BW, Less Taxes bmanning (May 29)
- Re: More BW, Less Taxes Simon Lockhart (May 29)