Re: Naive question on multiple TCP/IP channels and please dont start a uS NN debate here unless you really want to.

Richard Shockey <> Thu, 05 February 2015 23:34 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73F751A700B for <>; Thu, 5 Feb 2015 15:34:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.035
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.035 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8eEIWbAKRhD9 for <>; Thu, 5 Feb 2015 15:34:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with SMTP id 77F771A0089 for <>; Thu, 5 Feb 2015 15:34:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 14756 invoked by uid 0); 5 Feb 2015 23:34:42 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO CMOut01) ( by with SMTP; 5 Feb 2015 23:34:42 -0000
Received: from ([]) by CMOut01 with id onab1p00w1MNPNq01naeev; Thu, 05 Feb 2015 16:34:41 -0700
X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=J8Y5smXS c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=jTEj1adHphCQ5SwrTAOQMg==:117 a=jTEj1adHphCQ5SwrTAOQMg==:17 a=cNaOj0WVAAAA:8 a=f5113yIGAAAA:8 a=Fm5PWBbyStgA:10 a=8WrITzYgnNwA:10 a=HGEM6zKYvpEA:10 a=0HtSIViG9nkA:10 a=PeFO9FbFhS32YxYntvkA:9 a=dci_DRCyiIAA:10 a=CiRkrLRW1GAA:10 a=iycWLhIX580A:10 a=ll-iCDY8AAAA:8 a=M0OflfRGAAAA:8 a=jchyTy1MCVp1A7gxl-YA:9 a=wPNLvfGTeEIA:10 a=ivbTfD_dPm4A:10 a=6fpOX-4qs7AA:10 a=BQYh4w-RC7EA:10 a=Vv0CuZ_FElrh6kFtluUA:9 a=OhyN4mFxAGLCy-0N:21 a=_W_S_7VecoQA:10
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=default; h=Content-type:Mime-version:Message-ID:CC:To:From:Subject:Date; bh=CwDU0H5ku9iyjowom933AAzb0WmD0+uqYvv/DyoizLE=; b=nts+FwjXznWMHMqrYGny5Cp1jrnJkDJO4H2hZqx95Vwqh57pDdh6DQsM2bU3z1XLM3/aIHhcWrimWed3MOmluIttZz1pW38+R54aAeLycKsys9TDzo1vQGysLyusvN+V;
Received: from [] (port=55246 helo=[]) by with esmtpa (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <>) id 1YJVwS-0000ti-A3; Thu, 05 Feb 2015 16:34:36 -0700
User-Agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2015 18:34:32 -0500
Subject: Re: Naive question on multiple TCP/IP channels and please dont start a uS NN debate here unless you really want to.
From: Richard Shockey <>
To: Phillip Hallam-Baker <>, Jim Gettys <>
Message-ID: <>
Thread-Topic: Naive question on multiple TCP/IP channels and please dont start a uS NN debate here unless you really want to.
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="B_3506006076_1569259"
X-Identified-User: {} {sentby:smtp auth authed with}
Archived-At: <>
Cc: "" <>, IETF Discussion Mailing List <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2015 23:34:44 -0000


OK yes, My Netflix download is going to kill your VOIP call.

RS > Well ..its always been more subtle than you think. You have to
distinguish between a Voice OVER IP call aka Skype etc vs a ³managed
service² like Voice USING IP or VuIP which is an entirely different beast.
Modern VuIP which is all of Cable Voice in Europe and the US  VZ FIOS etc
and VoLTE is managed and  uses IP technologies such as SIP/IMS but the
routing may or may not have anything to  to do with BGP.  And BTW you have
to still do the first order number translation as well.  AKA RFC 6116 ENUM
or something new which we are actually debating in RAI.

Its segmented managed traffic. Its not Netfilx killing Skype its Microsoft
Apple Android Updates as well.   We have no visibility on how the OS
actually queues application packets if at all.

Can't fix the queuing algorithm for just one interaction...

The reason I started pushing on this is that in the wake of Title II I am
expecting a lot of people to be asking me to explain how the Internet
worketh and this is precisely the sort of example that shows how (1) things
are more complex than they appear, (2) how some sort of coordination is
needed and (3) how the coordination needs to take less than five years to
come to a decision.

RS>  You really really don¹t want to go into the US NN debate.  Been there
done that.  The people who would have called you already called someone
else.  The outcome here in the US after February 26 when the FCC Order drops
is already predetermined. The Zombies take over (aka the lawyers) it goes
back to the courts. Its totally partisan. Kabuki Theatre.  Nothing happens.
But Nothing is perhaps a reasonable outcome here. First do no harm.

Richard Shockey
Shockey Consulting LLC
Chairman of the Board SIP Forum
Skype-Linkedin-Facebook rshockey101
PSTN +1 703-593-2683