Will Providers Provide Equally?
theodp writes "Imagine the chaos if your power company could take money from Sony so that its appliances got a higher quality of juice - and thus worked a tad better - than those of Mitsubishi. The power system wasn't built that way, but ISPs have that very capability. It may seem like a dodgy competitive tactic, but Yankee Group analysts envision that broadband network providers could give precedence to their own revenue-generating services, possibly leading to the demise of the biggest VoIP player today, Vonage."
It seems to me that all one would have to do to get around this is to use SSL. ISPs wouldn't be able to lower the priority of such communications without affecting many other applications, such as VPNs. They could still do it based on IP, but not if the providers of a service used some large provider like Akamai.
Anyway, regardless of whether it could be circumvented, and at what cost, the implication is still a further push away from the original spirit of the internet towards a network that is solely a means of extracting as much revenue from consumers as possible. I just wish it were more realisitc to create an ad-hoc network with all my friends...and their friends, etc. I think some day that is what the tech community will be forced to turn to someday, in order to retain the usability we have come to cherish.
Of couse keeping this theoretical peer network free and uncommercial would be very tough, if it got popular. Call me paranoid, but I'm looking into affordable methods of connecting my friends directly together, using wireless technology and encryption.
"Imagine the chaos if your power company could take money from Sony so that its appliances got a higher quality of juice - and thus worked a tad better - than those of Mitsubishi"
Actually, our local utility, BC Hydro does this already. They have lower rate schedules if you are a customer willing to be interruptible during peak demand. So, some commercial and industrial customers here do indeed have a "higher quality of juice" than others.
Slashdot is entertaining like pro wrestling is entertaining
What is likely is that the cable companies phone service will work better anyways.
While their phone service is going to be IP based, it isn't going to be Internet based.
I live in an area where it is being beta tested, and I understand they are using an ATA with an integrated cable modem that installs at the phone box. This would allow them to tie into your wiring, provide real 911 service (the box isn't portable enought that you are likely to take it anywhere) etc.. It will use a diferent private addressing scheem and QOS end to end on their own gateway. Chances are it will use bandwith allocated seperately from the actual cable modems, so there should be no impact to other services such as Vonage or Broadvoice.
For them not to do this would be crazy. They are going to be trying to take on the Bells, and while Vonage is great for geeks, I can cause it to break up with heavy file transfers.
On the other side, the cable companies service which is currently being advertised is somewhere well in between the Vonage and SBC pricing.
that Da ISH is built from, and there will be more classifications. you want higher priority, you pay more. there are multiple names for service priority, MPLS on ethernet, CBR/VBR/VBRnt on ATM, service levels on frame relay if a carrier implements them -- but it's real.
ISPs buy what they want, and if it's not a dedicated point-to-point circuit, they are usually buying traffic-interruptable service like VBRnt or frame. remember, the Internet is best-attempt by definition already, and YOUR software has to deal with anything other than sequential packets sent at a constant rate of speed. you don't like that, stay on POTS, or upgrade your software.
if you want PRIORITY service, with MPLS on the switching/routing end and higher classes of service like CBR availiable for a sub-circuit of an ISP's T3 to an upline, for instance, that can become possible quite easily. it gets more complicated if you want it beyond an ISP's reach, but it can be done sometime as soon as agreements are reached to allow it.
the Bells are offering or tarriffing to offer such priority VoIP services now. for the Internet to offer it, you will need to have a protocol approved by IETF for it. propose or lobby against over there.
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
I'm not paying them to mess with my connection to their own advantage. If they started doing this I'd be on my way to another provider in a heartbeat.
Really? Well, go read Norton's "The Art of Peering - The Peering Playbook" to see how providers mess with your connection to their advantage on a pretty regular basis.
Good luck finding a provider that doesn't either a.) play this game themselves or b.) purchase wholesale bandwidth from an upstream who plays
Currently, the major backbone providers like Sprint et al are already providing QOS for VOIP services currently used by major corporations (i.e. Cisco) to communicate between offices. This hasn't propogated down to the ISP level yet but there's no reason it couldn't.
Also, at the ISP level, Speakeasy already has a package that preferentially routes online game packets, providing better performance for subscribers. In fact Speakeasy toutes itself as the "gamer's ISP".
I browse Slashdot at +3, Funny
Norton's paper is on financial and reciprocal negotiation strategies on ISP backbone peering. It doesn't say anything about queuing mechanisms at those peering points. The words "queue" and "qos" don't appear anywhere in there.
I think what he meant by "mess with" (I'm guessing) is adjusting traffic priorities based on application data.
ISPs do not get their protection from common carrier status. They get it from the Safe Harbor provisions of the DMCA. This protects ISP from copyright violations committed by their customers, as long as the ISP follows the required procedures. The first is to register with the government as an ISP. Favoring their own services would not affect their Safe Harbor rights.
Tm
Support TBI Research: http://www.raisinhope.org
Most ISPs would not qualify as common carriers. Part of being a common carrier is offering a service to the public in a non-discriminatory manner. That means that you can't say "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone". If the New Hitler Youth for Nuking Gay Whales orders service, you have to give it to them. You can't disconnect them for being controversial, as long as they pay their bills and do not violate the law.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat