Voice over ip

[TheBlueRaja]

You see QOS as some sort of overlord of the internet, and its far from it. QOS works by assigning bandwidth where it is NEEDED, WHEN it is needed. Why have a huge bandwidth pipe which is only used to its potential when someone transmits Voice or Video over it. Its a waste.

Think of a broadband connection, say you have a 600k link, how much of the time is that maxed out? Very rarely for most people i would argue. QOS allows providers to assign bandwidth where it is needed at the TEMPORARY expense of non time critical applications.

Its not a permanent cap.

In addition to your argument about the cost of bandwidth, how much has the price of NTL's connections come down over the last couple of years?

[TheBlueRaja]

Anyhoo, to get a little bit deeper for the doubters,
Another point to concider here is that QOS isnt just about bandwidth, its also about queing at ports. You want voice packets to get "out" before anything else, and that means at the expence of anything else as a late packet of voice is as good as a dropped packet, its useless. Voice is NOT retransmitted, data is. If you have a voice transmission going on accross a network, and a file transfer at the same time you need to ensure that the voice packets are transfered and processed by the routers before anything else so that processing delay is reduced and that its not help up by a large packet of data.

Oh and by the way TCP is not used for voice transmission UDP is.

[Stuartbe]

Originally Posted by erol

Bandwidth - how much ?

This year x
next year 1/2 x
year after 1/4 x
year after 1/8 x

thats the reality of coat of bandwidth. We have seen the same example with other computing resources. People used to use 'sophisticated' techiques to save resources like computing power (coding in machine code), or storage space (like HD compression) - but with the price of these falling at moores law rate it's cheaper, simpler and more effective to 'throw resource' at them. With bandwidth though the issue of control is the real issue. Who will control what you can do with your connection. At the moment the end user has control (TCP=transmission CONTROL protocal). The current network owners would love to get that control back - and QoS is a great 'excuse' to do it. What you will end up with is a network that looks more like the mobile phone companies networks than the internet. Throwing bandwidth at the problem is not the expensive option - it's the cheap option !

I can only agree 50/50 on this one m8...

50% yep you are right. We need more bandwidth and a damb good worldwide infrastructure as soon everything is going to be piped by the net. Phone, tv, internet and even video phone. Without this infrastructure in place this is not going to happen !

50% I dont think that the solution just lies in throwing bandwidth at the problem. Software and hardware compresion does have an impotant role to play. Dont forget - we are going to have routers and other equiptment and they have to be able to handle the bandwidth. Its only sensible to minimise the ammount of data that we send no matter how big the pipe. If we dont we are going to get what happens on the U.K.'s motorways.... Gridlock.

IMHO for all this to hapen there needs to be an independant body that looks after it all and works with all the countries envolved. They allso need to be in charge of security. The problem with a global infrastructure is that it makes an idea way of people attcking other people and this will happen. Perhaps a new tcp suite desighned for the job is the way to....

Its a bright future but if we rush in we could be talking about a worldwide crash of everthing. How much would it cost if this system was brough down... Billions and billions !!!! The electronic and of the world... Sounds far fetched but no ever thought code red would ever happen !

Thought planning and investment are the keywords - lets walk before we start to run......

* that was a party political broadcast brought to you by the stuartbe party *

[erol]

Originally Posted by theblueraja

You see QOS as some sort of overlord of the internet, and its far from it. QOS works by assigning bandwidth where it is NEEDED, WHEN it is needed. Why have a huge bandwidth pipe which is only used to its potential when someone transmits Voice or Video over it. Its a waste.

No I see QoS as having the potential to allow the gains (for users), of having the control layer removed from the internet infrastructure (what TCP/IP does) to be reversed - at the expense of users of the network and to the benefit of the owners of the network. It is based on a false premise that bandwidth is scarce - a false premise it is in the interests of the network owners tomaintain as long as they can get away with it.

Why have a huge pipe? - Because when it costs billions to dig up the road to lay the pipe and yet costs the same to put in 'unlimited' capacity as it does to put in 'tiny capacity' it is a waste to not put in 'unlimited' capacity. Which is exactly why over 90% of all the fiber already in the ground in the UK is simply UNUSED at the moment.

Originally Posted by theblueraja

Think of a broadband connection, say you have a 600k link, how much of the time is that maxed out? Very rarely for most people i would argue. QOS allows providers to assign bandwidth where it is needed at the TEMPORARY expense of non time critical applications.

You have said it yourself. QoS will allow the PROVIDER to assign bandwidth. That is the problem with QoS. If the internet from day one had allowed for the network owner and not the user to control what the connection could be used for, then we would not have a whole raft of applications. We would certainly not have online gaming like we do now (no network owner would allow such frivolous wastage of it's 'precious' resource). Email would be an anethma - as it would eat into 'fax' profits. Even when it was relesased by the network owner it would only work on thier network and require a 'roaming' deal with other operators to pass it between themselves, all with appropriate charges. VoIP - forget it. P2P - hah! Just look at the mobile networks to get an idea how a controled internet might look.

Originally Posted by theblueraja

In addition to your argument about the cost of bandwidth, how much has the price of NTL's connections come down over the last couple of years?

[/QUOTE]

I can not help it if NTL decided to build the 'wrong' kind of network and now want us to pay for it. The cost of bandwidth IS falling year on year and faster than processor prices are falling and has done so steadily and consistently for the last 20-30 years. It is certainly a valid question as to why these benefits have not been passed onto the end users, and one I am constanly asking myself.

Imaginr you have a coroporate LAN. It's current shared capacity is 1Mbs. You want to be able to have good quality voice and video links over this network. Do you

a) Spend loads of time money and resources (say amount X) on building in sophistciated network level controls, in hardware and sw that allow a 'central controller' to decide who and what should have priority and allow them to 'slice up' this limited bandwidth on an as and when basis (so that when the MD wants to talk / video then eveything else is put on hold).

or

b) Spend 1/2 X upgrading the network to a dumb, uncontrolled 100Mbs (or even gig ethernet) network - and just let the users get on with it.

Both soloutions allow decent quality voice and video. If your objective is to 'serve' the user of the network then option b is the best. If your objective is to control the users then option a has its merits.

[erol]

Originally Posted by stuartbe

50% I dont think that the solution just lies in throwing bandwidth at the problem. Software and hardware compresion does have an impotant role to play.

Compression is not a problem, because it can be implemented under the control of the users of the network and does not require the 'permission' of the network owner.

Originally Posted by stuartbe

Its only sensible to minimise the ammount of data that we send no matter how big the pipe. If we dont we are going to get what happens on the U.K.'s motorways.... Gridlock.

If the amount of traffic that the roads could carry doubled every year, for the same cost of maintaining them, then gridlock would not exists. I know this stuff is counter intutive. We simply have never had 'unlimited' resources before the 'digital age'. When the resource moves towards unlimited at near zero cost the only sensible thing to do id to waste it!

[Florence]

I have been using skype for a few months now. Its very good no breaks except if the other person talks while you are...

It is extremely good and they are clear when you listen. easy to set up.

[Jerrek]

I'm dumping my phone line soon. I'm getting Vonage. Check it out: http://www.vonage.com.

[Bifta]

Originally Posted by Jerrek

I'm dumping my phone line soon. I'm getting Vonage. Check it out: http://www.vonage.com.

About as much use as a chocolate fireguard for us Europeans.

[Jerrek]

It will probably expand to Europe. Anyways, there's bound to start a company in Europe that offers the same service.

[darant]

Originally Posted by Ramrod

Is it possible for me to use my headset/mic to make free phone calls to normal phones? If so, how?

I currently use Skype...... The quality is superb. The confrence function is excellent also.


http://www.skype.com/

[tkiely]

OK, having failed to get hold of my friend I took the dangerous step of clicking the menu myself

in messenger, it's 'Actions'|'Make a Phone Call'

simple really. You do need to have signed up with a voice service providor though.

They work on a prepay basis but are extremely cheap.

[zovat]

skype now has a dial facility (windows only ), that seems pretty reliable

[Millay]

I currently use pipecall from pipemedia, it costs 2.9 a month comes with a 0845 number, I use my stereo speakers and a pc mic to make and receive callls.. The service is such good quality I have dropped my landlien. Admittedly you can tell your voice has been heavilly encoded, but for a noraml telephone conversation its great, and the fact my voicemails and faxes goto my email address, thus following me around is great.. VoIP is really becoming a reality now! id say givie it a go, you only sign up for one month at a time so give it a trial.. www.pipemedia.com

ps the software i use is the x-ten soft phone. but you can buy a SIP ready handset for £60

oh the only thing to remeber if your uploading files on bit torrent or to a server, you might gfet some delays in your voice call.. (need QoS)...