5 ms·

It is not. If Netflix did not have PNIs to Comcast, Comcast internet would have been unusable for everyone. [Edit: Post more downvotes] Guess what happens to

It is not. If Netflix did not have PNIs to Comcast, Comcast internet would have been unusable for everyone. [Edit: Post more downvotes] Guess what happens to the Netflix traffic when the best route to Netflix is over Comcast transit?

wtallis 9y ago
> If Netflix did not have PNIs to Comcast, Comcast internet would have been unusable for everyone. Only under the assumption that Comcast makes no attempt to do their job properly and uphold their contractual obligations by implementing reasonable QoS measures and upgrading their capacity. You can't point to Comcast's extortionist refusal to upgrade their links to the outside world and say that it's Netflix's fault; that was just their abusive tactic to force Netflix to deal with Comcast directly on Comcast's terms. Verizon did the same thing.
- notyourday 9y ago
  QoS does not stand for Quality of Service. It stands for Quantity of Service. It also seems that you believe that QoS works by magic and not by dropping packets on the floor that meet certain criteria. Those criterias are gasp protocol and destination. It is no different from you putting a rate limits your API based on the token used to authenticate a client or a route used. But hey, yes, NN is telling me I should at best use RED to do QoS as everything else requires lookng at protocol and destination > You can't point to Comcast's extortionist refusal to upgrade their links to the outside world and say that it's Netflix's fault; that was just their abusive tactic to force Netflix to deal with Comcast directly on Comcast's terms. Verizon did the same thing. I live in a real world. In the real world if I am to take 10Mbit/sec that Comcast objectively delivers to the edge and multiply it by the number of edges that comcast has I arrive at the number of megabit/sec that does not exist in all interconnect points combined. Comcast has no way of upgrading it to that point. It is simply not possible. There's not a single network that can provide this kind of capacity even at 10Mbit/sec, not to mention at 50Mbit/sec or 150Mbit/sec or Gigabit/sec. The only way to deal with this is PNIs between those that originate massive amounts of traffic and the networks that consume massive amounts of traffic. Your JoeSchmoe.com does not get to have a PNI until it can afford to pay for it because it has enough traffic.
  - wtallis 9y ago
    > QoS does not stand for Quality of Service. It stands for Quantity of Service. Fuck you. You aren't even trying to have a reasonable conversation, are you? You're welcome to attempt to argue that there's an unavoidable equivalence between QoS as everybody defines it and the other concept you're trying to equate it to, but you have to actually make that argument, not just declare the definition of QoS to have changed because you don't like what it means. QoS still stands for Quality of Service. > But hey, yes, NN is telling me I should at best use RED to do QoS as everything else requires lookng at protocol and destination You can use CoDel without violating any principles of net neutrality. You can even use FQ-CoDel without violating the principles of net neutrality, because it only looks at port numbers to determine which packets are related to each other; each port is subjected to the same set of rules and no port is preferred over another. Net neutrality doesn't require you to ignore the past 20+ years of research into QoS. It may help your political cause to regard QoS as being strictly a zero-sum game, but that doesn't make it true. > There's not a single network that can provide this kind of capacity even at 10Mbit/sec, not to mention at 50Mbit/sec or 150Mbit/sec or Gigabit/sec. > The only way to deal with this is PNIs between those that originate massive amounts of traffic and the networks that consume massive amounts of traffic. The technical requirements of having large, reasonably direct links between big producers and big consumers does not say anything about whether Netflix has to negotiate with Comcast and Verizon directly, or whether they can outsource those concerns to Level 3. That's purely in the domain of business shenanigans.
    - notyourday 9y ago
      > You're welcome to attempt to argue that there's an unavoidable equivalence between QoS as everybody defines it and the other concept you're trying to equate it to, but you have to actually make that argument, not just declare the definition of QoS to have changed because you don't like what it means. QoS still stands for Quality of Service. QoS being a quantity of service is a very well known term, pioneered and popularized by Dave Rand/Avi Freedman to describe that QOS establishes which packets are to be dropped on the floor first. QOS might work OK on networks with microspikes but it completely breaks on networks that are > 20% oversubscribed. If I were made to pick between positions of Dave Rand and Avi Freedman and positions of all people supporting Net Neutrality, I would go with the first two as those people actually built networks. > Net neutrality doesn't require you to ignore the past 20+ years of research into QoS. This only works within a single AS. It has been demonstrated when a pair of crazy dudes built a Sprintlink on a top of ANS without ANS' knowledge. > The technical requirements of having large, reasonably direct links between big producers and big consumers does not say anything about whether Netflix has to negotiate with Comcast and Verizon directly, or whether they can outsource those concerns to Level 3. That's purely in the domain of business shenanigans. It does. Without that you end up with Enron.

wtallis 9y ago

> If Netflix did not have PNIs to Comcast, Comcast internet would have been unusable for everyone. Only under the assumption that Comcast makes no attempt to do their job properly and uphold their contractual obligations by implementing reasonable QoS measures and upgrading their capacity. You can't point to Comcast's extortionist refusal to upgrade their links to the outside world and say that it's Netflix's fault; that was just their abusive tactic to force Netflix to deal with Comcast directly on Comcast's terms. Verizon did the same thing.

notyourday 9y ago
QoS does not stand for Quality of Service. It stands for Quantity of Service. It also seems that you believe that QoS works by magic and not by dropping packets on the floor that meet certain criteria. Those criterias are gasp protocol and destination. It is no different from you putting a rate limits your API based on the token used to authenticate a client or a route used. But hey, yes, NN is telling me I should at best use RED to do QoS as everything else requires lookng at protocol and destination > You can't point to Comcast's extortionist refusal to upgrade their links to the outside world and say that it's Netflix's fault; that was just their abusive tactic to force Netflix to deal with Comcast directly on Comcast's terms. Verizon did the same thing. I live in a real world. In the real world if I am to take 10Mbit/sec that Comcast objectively delivers to the edge and multiply it by the number of edges that comcast has I arrive at the number of megabit/sec that does not exist in all interconnect points combined. Comcast has no way of upgrading it to that point. It is simply not possible. There's not a single network that can provide this kind of capacity even at 10Mbit/sec, not to mention at 50Mbit/sec or 150Mbit/sec or Gigabit/sec. The only way to deal with this is PNIs between those that originate massive amounts of traffic and the networks that consume massive amounts of traffic. Your JoeSchmoe.com does not get to have a PNI until it can afford to pay for it because it has enough traffic.
- wtallis 9y ago
  > QoS does not stand for Quality of Service. It stands for Quantity of Service. Fuck you. You aren't even trying to have a reasonable conversation, are you? You're welcome to attempt to argue that there's an unavoidable equivalence between QoS as everybody defines it and the other concept you're trying to equate it to, but you have to actually make that argument, not just declare the definition of QoS to have changed because you don't like what it means. QoS still stands for Quality of Service. > But hey, yes, NN is telling me I should at best use RED to do QoS as everything else requires lookng at protocol and destination You can use CoDel without violating any principles of net neutrality. You can even use FQ-CoDel without violating the principles of net neutrality, because it only looks at port numbers to determine which packets are related to each other; each port is subjected to the same set of rules and no port is preferred over another. Net neutrality doesn't require you to ignore the past 20+ years of research into QoS. It may help your political cause to regard QoS as being strictly a zero-sum game, but that doesn't make it true. > There's not a single network that can provide this kind of capacity even at 10Mbit/sec, not to mention at 50Mbit/sec or 150Mbit/sec or Gigabit/sec. > The only way to deal with this is PNIs between those that originate massive amounts of traffic and the networks that consume massive amounts of traffic. The technical requirements of having large, reasonably direct links between big producers and big consumers does not say anything about whether Netflix has to negotiate with Comcast and Verizon directly, or whether they can outsource those concerns to Level 3. That's purely in the domain of business shenanigans.
  - notyourday 9y ago
    > You're welcome to attempt to argue that there's an unavoidable equivalence between QoS as everybody defines it and the other concept you're trying to equate it to, but you have to actually make that argument, not just declare the definition of QoS to have changed because you don't like what it means. QoS still stands for Quality of Service. QoS being a quantity of service is a very well known term, pioneered and popularized by Dave Rand/Avi Freedman to describe that QOS establishes which packets are to be dropped on the floor first. QOS might work OK on networks with microspikes but it completely breaks on networks that are > 20% oversubscribed. If I were made to pick between positions of Dave Rand and Avi Freedman and positions of all people supporting Net Neutrality, I would go with the first two as those people actually built networks. > Net neutrality doesn't require you to ignore the past 20+ years of research into QoS. This only works within a single AS. It has been demonstrated when a pair of crazy dudes built a Sprintlink on a top of ANS without ANS' knowledge. > The technical requirements of having large, reasonably direct links between big producers and big consumers does not say anything about whether Netflix has to negotiate with Comcast and Verizon directly, or whether they can outsource those concerns to Level 3. That's purely in the domain of business shenanigans. It does. Without that you end up with Enron.