5 ms·

Sure, but what happens when linksys sells the megaspeed router that adds the qos bit to every packet?

sylware 3y ago
Yep, client abuse of the IP QOS is an issue, the idea would be to split the traffic on 2 lanes: 1 - high priority, but very and really small bandwidth (usually depending on the line tech: xDSL, cable or fiber). Usually enough bandwidth for an handful of audio calls/game traffic streams. The client is in charge of that QOS on its domestic network though. 2 - the best effort lane. Namely, the ISP would have to enforce that QOS at the modem, or line collect, namely as close to the client as possible. IPv[46] has the TOS field for that with diffserv (other?). IPv6 could tell the ISP fine grained traffic requirements with pre-defined standard IPv6 labels. There is no reasonable reasons the ISP would charge for the "fast lane". It should be default and neutral to as many ISPs as possible and ISP transits/peerings should keep the priority of the fast lane. Since the bandwidth would be limited early the network hierarchy and omega shmol, this means little to no incentive to cheat on it. That would unlock "for almost sure" high quality audio communications (with the encrypted audio stream protocol chosen by the user software/hardware) and ultra fast gaming on domestic line internet.
- reaperman 3y ago
  This actually makes sense. Sadly I think my Roku TV would find a way to hog all of my low-latency QoS quota for data collection and advertisement purposes. But I really love the proposed paradigm a lot where everyone gets the same x% of their data as "fast-lane" and can use it for whatever they want. It's still "neutral" within the rationale of net neutrality, because the ISP isn't enforcing what lanes get used for what, the customer has total control.
  - supertrope 3y ago
    This is why Windows resets all DSCP bits to zero. Unless the PC is domain joined or you’ve manually set Group Policy. Otherwise every program would mark EF or CS7, kind of like how every smartphone app abuses notifications and wakelocks.
    - sylware 3y ago
      With this 2 lanes setup, if too many apps are abusing or dysfunctionning there, they won't work properly since the bandwidth would be severely limited as low as possible in the network hierarchy. People will mecanically drop those apps, unfortunately including the apps not abusing.
- ajb 3y ago
  There's actually a new (experimental) standard to do this, called L4S. It mandates that the high priority lane apps use a more responsive congestion control algorithm so that they build a much smaller queue (not just on average, avoiding occasional spikes too)
supertrope 3y ago
Tell the customer they can mark 0.5 Mbps of their upload traffic with EF. Anything more than that gets dropped. So if they set their BitTorrent client to mark EF they are only hurting themselves when their actually latency sensitive traffic suffers severe packet loss.
icedchai 3y ago
Probably nothing. The QoS bit is likely ignored as soon as the packets leave the ISP's network.

Yep, client abuse of the IP QOS is an issue, the idea would be to split the traffic on 2 lanes: 1 - high priority, but very and really small bandwidth (usually depending on the line tech: xDSL, cable or fiber). Usually enough bandwidth for an handful of audio calls/game traffic streams. The client is in charge of that QOS on its domestic network though. 2 - the best effort lane. Namely, the ISP would have to enforce that QOS at the modem, or line collect, namely as close to the client as possible. IPv[46] has the TOS field for that with diffserv (other?). IPv6 could tell the ISP fine grained traffic requirements with pre-defined standard IPv6 labels. There is no reasonable reasons the ISP would charge for the "fast lane". It should be default and neutral to as many ISPs as possible and ISP transits/peerings should keep the priority of the fast lane. Since the bandwidth would be limited early the network hierarchy and omega shmol, this means little to no incentive to cheat on it. That would unlock "for almost sure" high quality audio communications (with the encrypted audio stream protocol chosen by the user software/hardware) and ultra fast gaming on domestic line internet.

reaperman 3y ago
This actually makes sense. Sadly I think my Roku TV would find a way to hog all of my low-latency QoS quota for data collection and advertisement purposes. But I really love the proposed paradigm a lot where everyone gets the same x% of their data as "fast-lane" and can use it for whatever they want. It's still "neutral" within the rationale of net neutrality, because the ISP isn't enforcing what lanes get used for what, the customer has total control.
- supertrope 3y ago
  This is why Windows resets all DSCP bits to zero. Unless the PC is domain joined or you’ve manually set Group Policy. Otherwise every program would mark EF or CS7, kind of like how every smartphone app abuses notifications and wakelocks.
  - sylware 3y ago
    With this 2 lanes setup, if too many apps are abusing or dysfunctionning there, they won't work properly since the bandwidth would be severely limited as low as possible in the network hierarchy. People will mecanically drop those apps, unfortunately including the apps not abusing.
ajb 3y ago
There's actually a new (experimental) standard to do this, called L4S. It mandates that the high priority lane apps use a more responsive congestion control algorithm so that they build a much smaller queue (not just on average, avoiding occasional spikes too)

supertrope 3y ago

Tell the customer they can mark 0.5 Mbps of their upload traffic with EF. Anything more than that gets dropped. So if they set their BitTorrent client to mark EF they are only hurting themselves when their actually latency sensitive traffic suffers severe packet loss.

icedchai 3y ago

Probably nothing. The QoS bit is likely ignored as soon as the packets leave the ISP's network.