5 ms·

Real time data needs reliable and fast ping rate. This isn't dictated by the bandwidth, rather by the speed of the network devices. One way to achieve that is

Real time data needs reliable and fast ping rate. This isn't dictated by the bandwidth, rather by the speed of the network devices. One way to achieve that is introduction of QoS, the network devices prioritize some data over the other. If you want to observe this effect then try turning QoS on or off on your router during your wife's Netflix session while you're playing a multi-player RPG.

jessaustin 11y ago
Are you saying that users of realtime applications should be subsidized by all other internet users?
- splintercell 11y ago
  No, they should (and will) pay for themselves. On the other hand they will subsidize the rest of us. Kinda like how first class subsidizes the economy class. We let them board first, but our ticket becomes cheaper because of that.
  - jessaustin 11y ago
    ISTM the ratios involved are very different. Even a first class air passenger with fifty kilos of baggage only takes up slightly more space and weight than an economy air passenger. Since they might be paying five or more times as much, the service makes sense for airlines. The realtime network you envision is already available to users willing to buy e.g. dark fiber, for less of a premium (relative to bandwidth) than that. If that doesn't work for you, why not? Yes we know that big ISPs regularly raise examples like this as a reason why they shouldn't have to provide neutral service, but that is manifestly self-serving on their part.
  - jace 11y ago
    Nothing in net neutrality prevents you from buying a faster pipe where the provider guarantees priority for your packets using QoS or whatever they please. Net neutrality only prevents your provider from making this decision on your behalf.
    - splintercell 11y ago
      So either I upgrade my whole pipeline, or live with a slower pipeline? I currently run Samsung's Smartthings hub at home(and I love it), I would like the video feed and other notifications be available to me at real time speeds (don't ask why), you're suggesting that I upgrade my whole line for that? Wouldn't it be preferable that when I use Netflix, the video goes on a deprioritized network, and when I use Skype, it goes on priority network without me having to upgrade the whole service. The point is, from the consumer's point of view, the services he uses are a mixed bag of priority vs non-priority data. On the other hand, from the content provider's POV, the services they use are either priority, or non-priority (or a mixture, for instance paid subscribers are run through a faster network, etc etc). Net Neutrality prevents that, not because the conversations I am having in this thread with people is what happens in every NN debate.
  - arjun1296 11y ago
    >>first class subsidizes the economy class. We let them >>board first, but our ticket becomes cheaper because of >>that. You mean, like governments in capitalistic nations like the US running at the mercy of some say a 100 billionaires. I don't believe that is a viable model to follow in a egalitarian society of the internet. Currently, internet is the best example to prove in a different sense that anarchists (virtual)society can survive, lead and guide people to their goals. When people try to build establishment on top of this, thing take a different route altogether. Internet is like Marx's virtual economy ;)
chris_wot 11y ago
Net neutrality does not preclude QoS.
witty_username 11y ago
Most games I play have pretty steady ping. I am doubtful QoS would decrease ping a lot. > If you want to observe this effect then try turning QoS on or off on your router during your wife's Netflix session while you're playing a multi-player RPG. That's because the network is congested and Netflix keeps trying to push as many packets as possible, hence your game packets may not reach on time. But, placing a simple bandwidth limit on other devices is enough to ensure proper ping for your game. QoS only helps if the network is congested.
smarx007 11y ago
QoS is very, very silly approach to guarantee that a real-time deadline can be met. Over a conventional Ethernet, you can only achieve soft real-time (i.e. video streaming). For hard real-time (when people can literally die if the packet was not delivered in x ms) you need a protocol that has formally proven to have certain characteristics (like EtherCAT).
belorn 11y ago
QoS is not the technology used for hospitals, banks, airports, stock brokers and similar industries which need fast ping and guarantied network delivery. They use dedicated bandwidth, where QoS is used to alleviate issues resulting from congestion on shared networks. Dedicated bandwidth is also what pays for new cables being placed between nations or continents. A new cable can often promise a small improvement in latency compared to the existing ones, which for a stock broker means a major advantage over competitors who use the old ones. The highest paying customers moves to the new one, which result in space being made available in the old cables, which tickles down to lower paying customers until its no longer worth selling dedicated bandwidth (which is normally in the from of separate wavelengths), which at that point it get used by multiple customers at the same time and people start to talk about QoS to artificially increase the number of possible customers on the same available bandwidth. QoS is about selling bandwidth so it can pass over 100% usage. Dedicated bandwidth is about reliable network with fast latency. QoS is a way to increase the revenue of old cables and increase their lifetime. Dedicated bandwidth is what pays for new cables being placed in the ground or on the bottom of the sea.

jessaustin 11y ago

Are you saying that users of realtime applications should be subsidized by all other internet users?

splintercell 11y ago
No, they should (and will) pay for themselves. On the other hand they will subsidize the rest of us. Kinda like how first class subsidizes the economy class. We let them board first, but our ticket becomes cheaper because of that.
- jessaustin 11y ago
  ISTM the ratios involved are very different. Even a first class air passenger with fifty kilos of baggage only takes up slightly more space and weight than an economy air passenger. Since they might be paying five or more times as much, the service makes sense for airlines. The realtime network you envision is already available to users willing to buy e.g. dark fiber, for less of a premium (relative to bandwidth) than that. If that doesn't work for you, why not? Yes we know that big ISPs regularly raise examples like this as a reason why they shouldn't have to provide neutral service, but that is manifestly self-serving on their part.
- jace 11y ago
  Nothing in net neutrality prevents you from buying a faster pipe where the provider guarantees priority for your packets using QoS or whatever they please. Net neutrality only prevents your provider from making this decision on your behalf.
  - splintercell 11y ago
    So either I upgrade my whole pipeline, or live with a slower pipeline? I currently run Samsung's Smartthings hub at home(and I love it), I would like the video feed and other notifications be available to me at real time speeds (don't ask why), you're suggesting that I upgrade my whole line for that? Wouldn't it be preferable that when I use Netflix, the video goes on a deprioritized network, and when I use Skype, it goes on priority network without me having to upgrade the whole service. The point is, from the consumer's point of view, the services he uses are a mixed bag of priority vs non-priority data. On the other hand, from the content provider's POV, the services they use are either priority, or non-priority (or a mixture, for instance paid subscribers are run through a faster network, etc etc). Net Neutrality prevents that, not because the conversations I am having in this thread with people is what happens in every NN debate.
- arjun1296 11y ago
  >>first class subsidizes the economy class. We let them >>board first, but our ticket becomes cheaper because of >>that. You mean, like governments in capitalistic nations like the US running at the mercy of some say a 100 billionaires. I don't believe that is a viable model to follow in a egalitarian society of the internet. Currently, internet is the best example to prove in a different sense that anarchists (virtual)society can survive, lead and guide people to their goals. When people try to build establishment on top of this, thing take a different route altogether. Internet is like Marx's virtual economy ;)

chris_wot 11y ago

Net neutrality does not preclude QoS.

witty_username 11y ago

Most games I play have pretty steady ping. I am doubtful QoS would decrease ping a lot. > If you want to observe this effect then try turning QoS on or off on your router during your wife's Netflix session while you're playing a multi-player RPG. That's because the network is congested and Netflix keeps trying to push as many packets as possible, hence your game packets may not reach on time. But, placing a simple bandwidth limit on other devices is enough to ensure proper ping for your game. QoS only helps if the network is congested.

smarx007 11y ago

QoS is very, very silly approach to guarantee that a real-time deadline can be met. Over a conventional Ethernet, you can only achieve soft real-time (i.e. video streaming). For hard real-time (when people can literally die if the packet was not delivered in x ms) you need a protocol that has formally proven to have certain characteristics (like EtherCAT).

belorn 11y ago

QoS is not the technology used for hospitals, banks, airports, stock brokers and similar industries which need fast ping and guarantied network delivery. They use dedicated bandwidth, where QoS is used to alleviate issues resulting from congestion on shared networks. Dedicated bandwidth is also what pays for new cables being placed between nations or continents. A new cable can often promise a small improvement in latency compared to the existing ones, which for a stock broker means a major advantage over competitors who use the old ones. The highest paying customers moves to the new one, which result in space being made available in the old cables, which tickles down to lower paying customers until its no longer worth selling dedicated bandwidth (which is normally in the from of separate wavelengths), which at that point it get used by multiple customers at the same time and people start to talk about QoS to artificially increase the number of possible customers on the same available bandwidth. QoS is about selling bandwidth so it can pass over 100% usage. Dedicated bandwidth is about reliable network with fast latency. QoS is a way to increase the revenue of old cables and increase their lifetime. Dedicated bandwidth is what pays for new cables being placed in the ground or on the bottom of the sea.