Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: Can P2P applications learn to play fair on networks?
From: Sean Donelan <sean () donelan com>
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 11:58:48 -0400 (EDT)


On Wed, 24 Oct 2007, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
The result is network engineering by politician, and many reasonable things can no longer be done.

I don't see that.

Here come the Congresspeople. After ICANN, next legistlative IETF standards for what is acceptable network management.

http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9804158-7.html

Rep. Boucher's solution: more capacity, even though it has been demonstrated many times more capacity doesn't actually solve this particular problem.

Is there something in humans that makes it difficult to understand
the difference between circuit-switch networks, which allocated a fixed amount of bandwidth during a session, and packet-switched networks, which vary the available bandwidth depending on overall demand throughout a session?

Packet switch networks are darn cheap because you share capacity with lots of other uses; Circuit switch networks are more expensive because you get
dedicated capacity for your sole use.

If people think its unfair to expect them to share the packet switch network, why not return to circuit switch networks and circuit switch pricing?


  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]
AlienVault