Re: Cogent admits to QoSing down streaming

> On Nov 6, 2014, at 12:32 PM, Blake Hudson wrote: > > Owen, should providers be able to over subscribe their networks? If so, at > what tier level (tier 1, 2, 3, residential ISP)? Is it acceptable for a > provider to permit frequent congestion if they choose to? Or should they be > forced to

Re: Cogent admits to QoSing down streaming

On Thu, 6 Nov 2014, Blake Hudson wrote: Owen, should providers be able to over subscribe their networks? If so, at what tier level (tier 1, 2, 3, residential ISP)? Is it acceptable for a provider to permit frequent congestion if they choose to? Or should they be forced to take action that may

Re: Cogent admits to QoSing down streaming

Owen, should providers be able to over subscribe their networks? If so, at what tier level (tier 1, 2, 3, residential ISP)? Is it acceptable for a provider to permit frequent congestion if they choose to? Or should they be forced to take action that may (potentially) lead to increased customer

Re: Cogent admits to QoSing down streaming

I agree. There's nothing wrong with it at all unless you claim you're not doing that and then do it secretly in order to forward an agenda. On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 12:12:43PM -0600, Blake Hudson wrote: > If I were a Cogent customer I would like to have seen more transparency > (an announcemen

Re: Cogent admits to QoSing down streaming

Personally I hope that such an environment never happens. Fast/slow lanes are pretty meaningless. Such service differentiation only has meaning when there’s persistent congestion and I’d rather that networks work out ways to scale past demand rather than throttle them. -dorian > On Nov 6, 201

Re: Cogent admits to QoSing down streaming

The way I read it was that Cogent actually made things look artificially better for M-Labs while simultaneously making it much worse for one subset of their users and somewhat better for others. I would suggest that if we get the educational process right, we should be able to explain that the

Re: Cogent admits to QoSing down streaming

If I were a Cogent customer I would like to have seen more transparency (an announcement at least). However, I don't see anything wrong with their practice of giving some customers "Silver" service and others "Bronze" service while reserving "Gold" for themselves. Even if applications like VoIP

Re: Cogent admits to QoSing down streaming

On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 12:04:17PM -0500, Jared Mauch wrote: > > > On Nov 6, 2014, at 12:02 PM, Livingood, Jason > > wrote: > > > > "Cogent practices net neutrality. We do not prioritize packet transmissions > > on the basis of the content of the packet, the customer or network that is > > th

Re: Cogent admits to QoSing down streaming

> On Nov 6, 2014, at 12:02 PM, Livingood, Jason > wrote: > > "Cogent practices net neutrality. We do not prioritize packet transmissions > on the basis of the content of the packet, the customer or network that is > the source of the packet, or the customer or network that is the recipient of

Re: Cogent admits to QoSing down streaming

I noticed that Cogent has a Net Neutrality statement. If I understand what they disclosed on the M-Lab list it does not seem to jive with this. The second sentence seems like what they said they are doing, right? http://www.cogentco.com/en/component/content/article/82 "Cogent practices net neut

Re: Cogent admits to QoSing down streaming

> On Nov 6, 2014, at 11:12 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: > > > > This is interesting. And it will be detrimental to network neutrality > supporters. Cogent admits that while the