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

Mikael Abrahamsson <> Thu, 11 November 2010 18:55 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C4A13A68A0; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 10:55:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.663
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.663 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.064, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TqXT51k-dkbr; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 10:55:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:801::f]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 673863A67E6; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 10:55:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: by (Postfix, from userid 501) id 59D3B9C; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 19:56:05 +0100 (CET)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56BA59A; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 19:56:05 +0100 (CET)
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 19:56:05 +0100 (CET)
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <>
To: Kathy McEwen <>
In-Reply-To: <001801cb81c9$9833c3d0$c89b4b70$>
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <01d801cb8083$8ca250f0$a5e6f2d0$> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <alpine.DEB.1.10.1011111806430.26> <001801cb81c9$9833c3d0$c89b4b70$>
User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (DEB 962 2008-03-14)
Organization: People's Front Against WWW
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 08:29:25 -0800
Cc:, 'httpstreaming' <>,, 'Ingemar Johansson S' <>, "'Mike Hammer \(hmmr\)'" <>, "'GARCIA ARANDA, JOSEJAVIER \(JOSE JAVIER\)'" <>
Subject: Re: [httpstreaming] [conex] [dispatch] Q-HTTP
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Network based HTTP Streaming discussion list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 18:55:39 -0000

On Thu, 11 Nov 2010, Kathy McEwen wrote:

> deploying additional capacity at the problem indefinitely. Policy management
> is emerging as a potential tool to get more capacity out of installed
> networks. Network policies are rules that are defined by the service

How would policy management get more *capacity* out of installed networks?

The only thing it can do is to perhaps increase the customer interactive 
experience of the network, but it doesn't increase capacity.

No matter how much you squeeze a dry stone, it's still dry. A network that 
is full is full, regardless how you prioritize traffic.

Also, I don't agree at all with the world reality the text describes. it 
might the writers reality, but it's not mine.

I'd rather build out more capacity with cheap fast simple equipment that 
moves packets without much intelligence, than to have more expensive 
complicated equipment that is slower but has more intelligence to 
"optimize" things.

10GE pricing is dropping each year, we have 100G(E) around the corner, 
networks can be built out, we have the technology.

Best effort is fine if ISPs actually make it *best* effort, and not 
mediocre or half-baked effort.

Mikael Abrahamsson    email: