North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Re: Westnet and Utah outage
- From: Edward Henigin
- Date: Wed Nov 29 10:11:29 1995
Other people have touched on it, but I'd like to re-iterate:
The quality that someone can expect out of their Internet connection,
as a practical matter, will somewhat vary with how much they're willing to
pay. It seems to me that giving someone <<1% downtime is an expensive
level of service. The Internet market today is not one where most customers
question the providers on the level of service; quite contrarily they
question the providers on how cheap they can go. This type of market
will be cost driven, and for my $19.95 unlimited PPP account, do you think
my ISP will be able to give me <<1% inaccessibility? Not without operating in
the red, I don't think.
I think most ISP's would be *delighted* to offer customers
Very High Quality service, but few customers are willing to pay for that
service. As a result, the final judgement of "how good is good enough"
will be "whatever the customer can live with," as compared to anything
that engineers like (ie 1%, 5%, etc).
(p.s. you notice I'm brushing aside the first question, being
"how do I *measure* the quality of service." Offhand, a weighted average
of all of the components that a given customer needs for a connection
makes the most sense to me.)
On Tue, 28 Nov 1995 firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> Sorry...I waited for additional replies but you seemed to be the only one to
> take my bait. My question was rhetorical.
> I hear all this complaining on this forum about unacceptable delay and packet
> loss by the ISP Community yet no "respected" industry standards body has yet
> set QOS guidelines for ISP's! An old management dictum says "if its
> important, measure it".
> I know where to look for QOS criteria on my physical plant (T1/DS3's), I even
> know where to look for QOS criteria for my old X.25 network. If we want
> things to get better w/i the ISP Community...let's define what better is.
> - jeff -