Re: [Cerowrt-devel] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-le-phb-06 is in last call

[Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>]

On Sun, 3 Feb 2019, David P. Reed wrote:

> This fairy story about traffic giving way to higher priority traffic 
> being a normal mode of operation is just that. A made up story, largely 
> used by folks who want to do selective pricing based on what customers 
> are willing to pay, not on value received. (that's a business story,

The point of PHB LE is so that the customer access shaper can background 
the customer LE traffic. It's not intended to be used by ISPs on their 
core links, it's intended for use on the customer access port.

If the customer buys 10 megabit/s Internet access then it's beneficial for 
the customer if the software update download doesn't affect the netflix 
stream and the kids' gameplay. Thus why we're trying to differentiate 
between BE and LE. FQ or CAKE can solve the gameplay, but it can't make 
the netflix stream get 90% of the rest of the capacity and give 5% to the 
software download. LE marking the software download traffic can do that.

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se