On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 12:13, Adrian Kennard <[email protected]> wrote: > Biggest issue is the likes of bit-torrents. They are lots of separate > tcp sessions so normal "full link" behaviour tends to balance between > tcp sessions not between customers.
Pardon the dense question, but: Why? Customer A is sending a bunch of packets, customer B is sending a bunch of packets; why bother to introspect at the tcp/ip layer at all? > Something more aware of per-customer > traffic levels and management is likely to be fairer, or something > specific to the types of traffic like this that are "unfair" somehow. Right, so if you do the traffic management in the core network (and I'm guessing it is), you're not going to have a clue what your customers are doing (at least not without an awful lot of nasty remote interrogation going on); what if you do it at the edge? Don't the DSLAMs know what their own port throughput is? And the switches they're connected to? and so forth? [W]FQ isn't exactly new-tech, and sticking stuff in the core to mitigate issues at the edge seems an awful lot like 'medicine' from the middle ages. M.
