On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Scott Helms <khelms@zcorum.com> wrote:
"My point is that the option should be there, at the consumer level."
Why? What's magical about symmetry? Is a customer better served by having a 5mbps/5mbps over a 25mbps/5mbps?
it sort of depends on what the user is doing, right? there's some chatter that (queue akapella in 3...2....) upstream ack packet loss is actually more detrimental to user experience than downstream packet loss, so maybe more upstream just to protect (and simplify) ack management is helpful?
"There are so many use cases for this, everything from personal game servers to on-line backups, that the lack of such offerings is an indication of an unhealthy market."
Until we get NAT out of the way, this is actually much harder to leverage than you might think. I don't think there is anything special about
because gameservers, backups, etc don't work just fine today in the 'world of nat' ??? I'm fairly certain that I can do backups to carbonite/etc with my nat working just fun, right? I'm also fairly certain that WoW (or whatever, hell I don't play games, so I'll just say: "Angband") etc that turn the fastest user in the group into a server also work just fine...
symmetrical bandwidth, I do think upstream bandwidth usage is going up and will continue to go up, but I don't see any evidence in actual performance stats or customers sentiment to show that it's going up as fast as downstream demand.
possibly because the places where this is available are so few and so far-between that 'users' don't generally know or see this? so ... err, they won't know if it's better for their usecases or not.