The MPLS WG Archive

[Curtis Villamizar <curtis@workhorse.fictitious.org>]

In message <OE20qiWoZwoD9lbEQ8x0000067d@hotmail.com>, "Frank Hujber" writes:
> Jie has the point. Well said. The IP disciples claim they can do as well as
> the SONET disciples, but even they admit, if only implicitly, that the
> Internet cannot carry real-time messaging as well as SONET, though I agree
> that it is more efficient w.r.t. bandwidth usage. (Consider how much R&D is
> going into things like VoIP and RSVP just to make it work for real-time
> applications.)
> 
> Frank Hujber


You are paying for commodity best effort IP service and asking for DVD
quality video from Australia.  This is an argument for QoS but needs
to be qualified by the question (don't answer this btw) "would you be
willing to pay more for this and if so how much?".

Today's routers can differentiate between traffic marked for a
preferred service and provide high quality video streams over
congested IP links as long as the video streams are marked as
preferred traffic.

This has nothing to do with SONET or IP technology.  Most (not all)
players in the ISP business simply haven't found a large enough
customer base willing to pay a large enough premium for the service to
make it more attractive to divert engineering attention from their
rapidly growing and profitable best effort IP service.

Curtis