On Thu, 18 Jul 2002, John Evans wrote:

I realise this is a US-centric list, however, a significant number of providers in Europe have deployed Diffserv as a means of supporting (and selling) differential SLAs. Of these, some have deployed Diffsev at the edge and some both the edge and core. See Clarence Filsfils presentation at NANOG 25 for a description of typical core deployments.

...

2. Hype aside, to what extent do customers actually want this

Surely end customers want a service with SLAs that will support their applications, and at low cost? It then becomes a provider cost consideration as to whether these SLA assurances can most competitively satisfied with mechanisms such as Diffserv or without.

I have to say that the majority of users barely understand how their outlook client works let alone the difference between applications. I'm starting to think theres no demand for these services other than that which the hype says is there. THis is in line with what people said about using qos behind the scenes but customers dont know.. kind of what I thought to begin with STeve

...

I conclude either the people doing this are successful and keep their secret safe or the world is yet to sell largescale QoS across IP.

or perhaps they are just not on this list.

cheers

John

...

-----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu]On Behalf Of Stephen J. Wilcox Sent: 14 July 2002 00:47 To: nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: QoS/CoS in the real world?

Well, end of the week and the responses dried up pretty quickly, I think thats a response in itself to my question!

Okay, heres a summary which was requested by a few people:

Other people too are interested in my questions, they dont implement QoS in any saleable manner and wonder how it can be done and whats actually required.

A number of people think QoS was interesting for a while but that its never either found its true use or is dead.

There are unresolved questions from a customer point of view as to what they are actually going to get, what difference it will make and how they can measure their performance and the improvements from QoS.

There is a real demand for guaranteed bandwidth, however this tends to be in the form of absolute guarantees rather than improvements above "normal" hence ATM remaining a popular solution.

There is a requirement to differentiate voice traffic, however this is necessarily done by the network anyway in order to offer the service, this being the case the customer doesnt pay extra or gets to know much about how all the fancy bits are done.

On the face of it this is all negative. Nobody has responded saying there are genuine requirements for services to be offered to customers. Nor has anybody responded with any descriptions of implementations.

I conclude either the people doing this are successful and keep their secret safe or the world is yet to sell largescale QoS across IP.

Steve

On Mon, 8 Jul 2002, Stephen J. Wilcox wrote:

...

Hi all, I've been looking through the various qos/cos options

...

area was in how IP (MPLS perhaps) compares and can be a substitute for ATM.

Well, theres lots of talk and hype out there, from simple IP queuing eg cisco priority queuing, rsvp, diffserv, mpls traffic engineering etc

But two things are bugging me..

1. To what extent have providers implemented QoS for their customers

2. Hype aside, to what extent do customers actually want this (and by this I dont just mean that they want the latest QoS because its the 'latest thing', there has to be a genuine reason for them to want it). And this takes me back to my ATM reference where there is a clear major market still out

available, my particular there of ATM

...

users and what would it take to migrate them to an IP solution?

Also, how are people implementing bandwidth on demand (dynamic allocation controlled by the customer) solutions to customers

Cheers

Steve