From: Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>
To: Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>
Cc: "Dave Täht" <dave.taht@gmail.com>,
ECN-Sane <ecn-sane@lists.bufferbloat.net>,
bloat <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: [Ecn-sane] 2019-12-31 docsis strict priority dual queue patent granted
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2020 09:01:27 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3D7A8E2C-5A8F-4FBB-89B0-9711E46CD560@gmx.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <95CC814B-9F95-4C79-BF47-ABB551B50429@gmail.com>
Hi Jonathan,
> On Jan 24, 2020, at 08:44, Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 24 Jan, 2020, at 7:37 am, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> "Otherwise, this exemplary embodiment enables system configuration to
>> discard the low-priority packet tail, and transmit the high-priority
>> packet instead, without waiting."
>
> So this really *is* a "fast lane" enabling technology. Just as we suspected.
They seem to be setting their customers up for a head-on collision with the European Union's net neutrality rules, according to which "special services/fast lanes" are permissible under the condition thay they are realized with completely dedicated addition bandwidth. Just looking at their patent diagram there is one common input path to the classifier. So either that fast lane is not going to be a paid for fast lane, or the ISPs rolling this out will be in hot water with the respective national regulators (at least in the EU). The one chance would be to give the end-user control over the classification engine, or if the strict priority path is only used for ISP originated VoIP traffic (I seem to recall there are weasel words in the EU rules that would allow that and ISPs are doing something like that already, and I agree that it is nice to be able to field an emergency call independent of access link load).
Best Regards
Sebastian
>
> - Jonathan Morton
> _______________________________________________
> Ecn-sane mailing list
> Ecn-sane@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/ecn-sane
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-01-24 8:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-01-23 2:29 Dave Taht
2020-01-23 8:21 ` Luca Muscariello
2020-01-24 5:37 ` Dave Taht
2020-01-24 7:44 ` Jonathan Morton
2020-01-24 8:01 ` Sebastian Moeller [this message]
2020-01-24 8:24 ` Dave Taht
2020-01-24 8:59 ` Dave Taht
2020-01-24 9:51 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2020-01-25 16:04 ` [Ecn-sane] [Bloat] " Dave Taht
2020-01-24 12:08 ` [Ecn-sane] " Sebastian Moeller
2020-01-25 16:21 ` [Ecn-sane] [Bloat] " Dave Taht
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://lists.bufferbloat.net/postorius/lists/ecn-sane.lists.bufferbloat.net/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3D7A8E2C-5A8F-4FBB-89B0-9711E46CD560@gmx.de \
--to=moeller0@gmx.de \
--cc=bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net \
--cc=chromatix99@gmail.com \
--cc=dave.taht@gmail.com \
--cc=ecn-sane@lists.bufferbloat.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox