On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, Alex Conta wrote:
> The Diffserv QoS engines in the access routers do a policing
> (classification&metering&dropping) that trims the high level QoS traffic
> -- hacked by a user, or not -- to the level specified in SLAs, TCAs. So,
> a user, at the most, uses up all that was contracted with the ISP, and
> paid for, anyway. This is in fact THE BEAUTY of THE MODEL.
You seem to assume that you would always spoof to get _better_ service.
This may not be the case, especially if you have to pay for the premium
(and ISP would want you to pay more, of course :). If e.g. some 3G
mobiles were using this mechanism, Bastard Operators might set it so that
some messages (think SMS) are dirty expensive compared to "normal
traffic". Then, if the user would be able to change the label to get
those for a cheaper price (and perhaps insignificant loss of QoS) and get
billed way less, he might do it.
Also, the idea that an operator might do QoS classification etc. on the
traffic _for free_ (e.g. add "low delay" to dport 22, 23; low cost to nntp
etc.) just to benefit the user(s) is unfamiliar to you? This is where
"spoofing" becomes annoying, because people don't pay for the extra QoS.
I think this was a basis in "spoofing better QoS capabilities"
discussion.
--
Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted,
Netcore Oy not those you stumble over and fall"
Systems. Networks. Security. -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
