3 ms·

Nobody should be surprised by this, I mean if you lock down hundreds of millions in western countries, what will they do in 2020 but online? I am fine with thr

Nobody should be surprised by this, I mean if you lock down hundreds of millions in western countries, what will they do in 2020 but online? I am fine with throttling these services, hospitals and research should be given top priority, followed by all remote workers (or general traffic if that's hard to distinguish). These massive leisure services should be at the very bottom of priority.

raxxorrax 7y ago
Leisure services should actually have a high priority if you plan to keep people home for some weeks and want them to stay there. I think traffic from research and hospitals is comparably low for that matter.
- swinglock 7y ago
  No, that's not how you run a working network. Bulk data doesn't need a higher priority in the first place, so giving it a higher priority will only do harm.
  - raxxorrax 7y ago
    Not a higher priority of course. Just keep it going. Speaking of which... quite a few conferencing solutions are down right now in central Europe.
    - swinglock 7y ago
      > Not a higher priority of course. Just keep it going. Sure, I agree. And if the hospital data is critical, you can already pay an ISP to get guaranteed bandwidth over a VPN between your hospitals. It will cost you dearly but if the best-effort nature of the Internet won't do it for you, you pay. > Speaking of which... quite a few conferencing solutions are down right now in central Europe. Isn't that because the backends of those services are overloaded, not because of congestion between networks? That happened to Microsoft Teams, I'm sure it happened to more of them.
  - leetcrew 7y ago
    is this discussion missing the important distinction between QoS and bandwidth limiting? I can certainly agree emergency communications warrant better QoS guarantees than a netflix stream; it's probably not a big deal if your stream drops more packets than usual, but it matters a lot for real-time communication. if we're talking about throttling connections, OP of this thread has a good point. if you want to keep people cooped up in their houses indefinitely, you gotta throw them a bone of some sort. throttling their netflix stream is going to piss people off, and at the margins, people might just say fuck it and go outside.
wyck 7y ago
Your missing the sub-text, a lot of Europe has crappy infrastructure, western countries should be able to handle this bandwidth without any issues. Blaming netflix is indicative that you have crappy IT.
- meh2frdf 7y ago
  Which countries specifically do you mean?
paulie_a 7y ago
I fully disagree, no one should be given priority.
- smkellat 7y ago
  There are basic communications principles that pre-date having an Internet. One of them is that emergency traffic let alone health & welfare traffic have precedence over routine traffic on communications systems. There can be voluntary prioritization of traffic to support emergency response now or the full legal power of multiple nation-states can be brought to bear to ensure traffic supporting emergency response gets handled first. What we have here is a critical vulnerability in that too much is dependent upon one backbone.
- rhino369 7y ago
  VOIP, VPN, video conferencing etc. traffic should be prioritized to enable working from home. It's a crisis. Economic cost of not being productive at home is worth degrading leisure activities (especially if its just 4k->480p). That doesn't its not clear that its necessary at this point. But it if is? Clinging to net neutrality is silly.

raxxorrax 7y ago

Leisure services should actually have a high priority if you plan to keep people home for some weeks and want them to stay there. I think traffic from research and hospitals is comparably low for that matter.

swinglock 7y ago
No, that's not how you run a working network. Bulk data doesn't need a higher priority in the first place, so giving it a higher priority will only do harm.
- raxxorrax 7y ago
  Not a higher priority of course. Just keep it going. Speaking of which... quite a few conferencing solutions are down right now in central Europe.
  - swinglock 7y ago
    > Not a higher priority of course. Just keep it going. Sure, I agree. And if the hospital data is critical, you can already pay an ISP to get guaranteed bandwidth over a VPN between your hospitals. It will cost you dearly but if the best-effort nature of the Internet won't do it for you, you pay. > Speaking of which... quite a few conferencing solutions are down right now in central Europe. Isn't that because the backends of those services are overloaded, not because of congestion between networks? That happened to Microsoft Teams, I'm sure it happened to more of them.
- leetcrew 7y ago
  is this discussion missing the important distinction between QoS and bandwidth limiting? I can certainly agree emergency communications warrant better QoS guarantees than a netflix stream; it's probably not a big deal if your stream drops more packets than usual, but it matters a lot for real-time communication. if we're talking about throttling connections, OP of this thread has a good point. if you want to keep people cooped up in their houses indefinitely, you gotta throw them a bone of some sort. throttling their netflix stream is going to piss people off, and at the margins, people might just say fuck it and go outside.

wyck 7y ago

Your missing the sub-text, a lot of Europe has crappy infrastructure, western countries should be able to handle this bandwidth without any issues. Blaming netflix is indicative that you have crappy IT.

meh2frdf 7y ago
Which countries specifically do you mean?

paulie_a 7y ago

I fully disagree, no one should be given priority.

smkellat 7y ago
There are basic communications principles that pre-date having an Internet. One of them is that emergency traffic let alone health & welfare traffic have precedence over routine traffic on communications systems. There can be voluntary prioritization of traffic to support emergency response now or the full legal power of multiple nation-states can be brought to bear to ensure traffic supporting emergency response gets handled first. What we have here is a critical vulnerability in that too much is dependent upon one backbone.
rhino369 7y ago
VOIP, VPN, video conferencing etc. traffic should be prioritized to enable working from home. It's a crisis. Economic cost of not being productive at home is worth degrading leisure activities (especially if its just 4k->480p). That doesn't its not clear that its necessary at this point. But it if is? Clinging to net neutrality is silly.