Re: [httpstreaming] [dispatch] Q-HTTP

Sent from my iPad

On Nov 9, 2010, at 7:01 PM, "Kathy McEwen" <kathy@iridescentnetworks.com> wrote:

> One problem with the voice analogy is that the sheer volume of data
> traversing the web today is not driven by voice...it's video...and it's not
> even a fraction of the viewing that folks are doing of broadcast content.  A
> solution that depends on "simply" having too much bandwidth, is that someone
> is paying for it.  Eventually it hits someone's pocket books....and if there
> isn't sufficient revenue to cover the costs, the too much does degrade.
> Today the mass media is consumed via cheap broadcast technologies... why
> shouldn't the web (fixed and mobile) be as cheap AND as good??  
> 

It should, the question is what is the cheapest way to do it. QoS is expensive too. I tend to agree with the thesis below that history is telling us that avoiding scarcity in the first place is cheaper than rationing here.

...Mark

> -----Original Message-----
> From: httpstreaming-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:httpstreaming-bounces@ietf.org]
> On Behalf Of Lars Eggert
> Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 8:02 PM
> To: David Singer
> Cc: Ingemar Johansson S; GARCIA ARANDA, JOSE JAVIER (JOSE JAVIER);
> httpstreaming; dispatch@ietf.org; conex@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [httpstreaming] [dispatch] Q-HTTP
> 
> On 2010-11-9, at 18:31, 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, the latter often ends up being the
> cheaper and easier solution.  So, for example, voice over IP is getting used
> quite a lot, and to good effect, on the internet today not because we have
> successfully deployed any bandwidth reservation or QoS management protocols
> and systems, but because the available bandwidth is, for the most part,
> greatly in excess of what is needed, and the systems can adapt in real-time
> to what they get (rather than asking for what they want).  The same is true
> for multimedia delivery;  the complexity of RTP + TCP friendliness + QoS
> management is not worth it compared to having adaptable end-systems and
> overall more bandwidth than needed.
> 
> Fully agreed. 
> 
> Folks who like pictures can take a look at
> https://fit.nokia.com/lars/talks/2008-mit-cfp.pdf, which gives much the same
> argument.
> 
> Lars
> 
> _______________________________________________
> httpstreaming mailing list
> httpstreaming@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/httpstreaming
> 