Re: [httpstreaming] [conex] [dispatch] Q-HTTP

Hi David,

In the end, SPs are driven by costs and revenus. Does option (a) represent the same cost as (b)? (I do not know..)

-How will the investment be paid  back in case of (a).. Raising subscription fees for everyone? Will that not lead to enhanced subscriber churn? Is net revenu then positive for the SP?

-How will the investment be paid back in case of (b)... Those subscribers that want 1st class service will be willing to pay extra for it. Other that won't, will probably sense they get a smaller piece of the bandwidth pie, and may decide to change SP. What is net revenu here?

My impression is that it is not immediately clear whether (a) or (b) or any mix of (a) and (b) is the best strategy for a SP.

Regards
Tom 

-----Original Message-----
From: httpstreaming-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:httpstreaming-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of David Singer
Sent: woensdag 10 november 2010 14:02
To: Roland Bless
Cc: dispatch@ietf.org; httpstreaming; conex@ietf.org; Ingemar Johansson S; GARCIA ARANDA, JOSE JAVIER (JOSE JAVIER)
Subject: Re: [httpstreaming] [conex] [dispatch] Q-HTTP

Hi Roland,

On Nov 10, 2010, at 9:11 , Roland Bless wrote:

> Hi David,
> 
> On 09.11.2010 11:31, David Singer wrote:
> 
>> It is that there are two ways to solve a real-time bandwidth need.
>> One is to reserve bandwidth, manage QoS and so on;  one gets 
>> protocols and systems like diffserv, ATM, and so on.  The other is 
>> simply to have 'too much' of the resource.  Though it feels wrong,
> 
> QoS mechanisms are usually only necessary if you've got some kind of 
> resource shortage. They try to manage the resource scarcity in some 
> way then. So having "too much of a resource" seems to imply that we 
> actually don't need any QoS support.
> 

I think this raises a question that happens at a service provider.  Imagine I observe that my networks are getting more busy, and decide to invest some more in them.  Do I (a) deploy a QoS management infrastructure or (b) use those same funds to pay for capacity upgrades?  I think that most operators end up choosing (b) as it 'lifts all boats', whereas they are not confident that anyone will use (a) in the near future, and they know it won't benefit everyone (and in fact, will be to the detriment of some users who don't use it, and were previously doing 'fair competition' for bandwidth and now are 'second class' behind those with reserved bandwidth).

David Singer
Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc.

_______________________________________________
httpstreaming mailing list
httpstreaming@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/httpstreaming