In my opinion, that kind of specialized services are a VPN. It’s no Internet.
----------------------------------------- Innocenzo Genna Genna Cabinet Sprl 1050 Bruxelles - Belgium Skype: innonews Twitter: @InnoGenna Email: [email protected] my blog:http://radiobruxelleslibera.wordpress.com/ my music: www.innocenzogenna.com Il giorno 20/mar/2014, alle ore 00:03, Patrik Fältström <[email protected]> ha scritto: > > > On 2014-03-19 20:13, Gordon Lennox wrote: >> On 19 Mar, 2014, at 18:34, Innocenzo Genna <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >>> 15) “specialized service” means an electronic communications >>> service */optimized for /*specific content, applications or services, >>> or a combination thereof, */provided over logically distinct capacity >>> and relying on strict admission control from end to end/*. It is not >>> marketed or */usable/* as a substitute for internet access service; >>> [its application layer is not functionally identical to services and >>> applications available over the public internet access service;] >> >> And that, particularly if the specialised service uses IP, is the problem? >> >> And end-to-end means to a particular device or, more probably, an end >> network controlled by the service supplier. >> >> I stopped liking "end-to-end" sometime back. >> > > I have no idea what and how to implement technically what they talk > about as "specialices service that does not impcat...". > > In a packet based network, if the outgoing interface is not full, all > packets will be forwarded as soon as possible. > > If the outgoing interface is full, then one can either queue all packets > equally (M/M/1 queuing theory) or one can have multiple queues (M/M/N). > If one have a specialized service that have some special treatment, then > by definition that implies longer delay on other queues (as packets get > reordered). > > Now, there are some special cases as well where the _services_ sold can > be different (i.e. some business connection with some SLA that is higher > than some SLA for end users paying less). > > What I think is sad is that they did not stop at saying for example: > > - Each provider of a service is required to always deliver to their > customers the service they have promised to deliver. (Regardless of what > other services they deliver to other customers on the same network...) > > Not any silly end-to-end. No silly "specialized service" etc. > > Then in other paragraphs they already (if I remember correctly) have > wording about equal treatment, dominant provider of services etc. > > Patrik >
