What I'm interested in is how the two service
providers will build a two tiered Internet.
The PSTN is tiered both in architecture and operation.
Switching hiearchies and a seperate SS7 network which
is basically a billing network.
I think the thought is service levels vs. congestion control.
For example, CO's have call overflow mechanisms to tandem switch
points which basically seek out excess capacity and use it as
overflow for call termination if and when possible.
I could see an internet hiearchy where preferred traffic was
switch onto hicap overflow links with controlled congestion and
other traffic, non premium traffic, "got a fast busy".
-M<
I could see an internet hiearchy where preferred traffic was
switch onto hicap overflow links with controlled congestion and
other traffic, non premium traffic, "got a fast busy".
given an internet where the congestion is at the edges, where
there are no alternate paths, i am not sure i understand your
suggestion.
fergie's message gets my vote for right-on message of the month.
this is all smoke.
randy
Exactly. They're scared that VoIP will eat them alive (probably right) and so they're rushing to 'do something about it' and so they're using the PUCs to legalize their monopolies. Can't have this router riff-raff running the show now can we. They've been watching income dwindle for a while now. Long distance isn't the cash cow it once was, with every cell phone getting free, at least nearly, or cheap LD. And the prospect of WiFi enabled cities, that means that no one has to pay them for the last mile, or at least a lot less people will, well, they (Ma Bell and the Babies) just can't have that.
I'm hoping to get some more time this week to really read through the proposed junk and get a better handle on *what* they're trying to do, other than the obvious of securing their revenue stream by all means necessary.
Fact is, we're (ISPs in general) all lighter, faster, and more aggressive.