Re: Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors
From owner-nanog@merit.edu Sat Mar 26 12:37:15 2005 Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 13:35:31 -0500 From: Eric Gauthier <eric@roxanne.org> To: "Fergie (Paul Ferguson)" <fergdawg@netzero.net> Cc: nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors
"...In what the company claims is an effort to preserve the performance of its pre-standard WiMAX network, Clearwire says it reserves the right to prohibit the use of a wide range of bandwidth-hungry applications, a list that apparently includes VoIP as well as the uploading or downloading of streaming video or audio, and high-traffic Web site hosting."
Hrm... Isn't a VoIP call realtively low bandwidth?
"*ALL* things are relative." <grin>
I haven't studied this, but Vonage's site seems to imply that the maximum data rate is 90Kbps (http://www.vonage.com/help_knowledgeBase_article.php?article=190). I typically see speeds greater than this from my web browser...
There's a big difference. web browser activity is typically *very* bursty. 'Average' data rate for a any single user is probably in the range of 1%-3% of the burst peaks. VoIP, on the other hand, has an "average" utilization that approximates 50% of the burst rate. In _both directions. I suspect that that latter factor is a fair part of the "problem". That the cable company has allocated fairly limited bandwidth for the 'upstream' direction (from the customer to the head-end). That that 'available' bandwidth is *grossly* over-subscribed, on the "presumption" that traffic in that direction would generally be "small", and "infrequent". When those assupmtions get violated, _everything_ goes to h*ll. <wry grin> Not just for 'he who' commits the violation, but everybody else who is sharing that over-subscribed link. This is what happens when you sell "up to $BIGNUM" connectivity, without discussing a minimum CCIR promise. IF a customer does get throttled/blocked, they might have some fun with a false advertising assertation.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Robert Bonomi wrote: |>From owner-nanog@merit.edu Sat Mar 26 12:37:15 2005 |>Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 13:35:31 -0500 |>From: Eric Gauthier <eric@roxanne.org> |>To: "Fergie (Paul Ferguson)" <fergdawg@netzero.net> |>Cc: nanog@merit.edu |>Subject: Re: Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors |> |> |> |>>http://www.advancedippipeline.com/news/159905772 |>> |> |>"...In what the company claims is an effort to preserve the performance |> of its pre-standard WiMAX network, Clearwire says it reserves the right |> to prohibit the use of a wide range of bandwidth-hungry applications, a |> list that apparently includes VoIP as well as the uploading or |> downloading of streaming video or audio, and high-traffic Web site |> hosting." |> |>Hrm... Isn't a VoIP call realtively low bandwidth? | | | "*ALL* things are relative." <grin> | |> I haven't studied |>this, but Vonage's site seems to imply that the maximum data rate is 90Kbps |>(http://www.vonage.com/help_knowledgeBase_article.php?article=190). I |>typically see speeds greater than this from my web browser... | | | There's a big difference. web browser activity is typically *very* bursty. | 'Average' data rate for a any single user is probably in the range of 1%-3% | of the burst peaks. | | VoIP, on the other hand, has an "average" utilization that approximates 50% | of the burst rate. In _both directions. | | I suspect that that latter factor is a fair part of the "problem". That | the cable company has allocated fairly limited bandwidth for the 'upstream' | direction (from the customer to the head-end). That that 'available' | bandwidth is *grossly* over-subscribed, on the "presumption" that traffic | in that direction would generally be "small", and "infrequent". When those | assupmtions get violated, _everything_ goes to h*ll. <wry grin> | | Not just for 'he who' commits the violation, but everybody else who is | sharing that over-subscribed link. Well, Since I run an ISP that is very small time, has (at this time) only a single T1 upstream, all my "subscribers" are wireless clients, I guess if I have more than 2 subscribers, I am over subscribed? Hardly seems fair. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCR+o80STXFHxUucwRAt6lAJ9/khqQ0iFFCwReKleCYvsPLePGzwCfZGbd Tg8q8nyPcYZQSpXSD9hajbA= =wZfh -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
participants (2)
-
Chip Mefford -
Robert Bonomi