QOS is NOT the issue here.

IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO

1,095 registered users | 1 active user | 1 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User

Welcome to IWETHEY!

Post #331,866

by folkert

8/25/10 10:22:17 PM

QOS is NOT the issue here.

QOS has been defined for a long time and it is understood and VOIP has to be guaranteed and honored if it Sets the QOS flag.

TOR, Bit-torrent and other things don't set the QOS flag.

You are comparing service flags vs content. Not entirely correct at all.

Post #331,875

by boxley

8/25/10 10:59:36 PM

bullshit greg, you know better

content is just thst. Everyone else is claiming all services are equal, that is their argument. If it isnt then you have government dictating what service is worth a higher QOS instead of the network operators. You sure that is where you want to go?
Think pinkon and moveorg are declared protected content as opposed to webmd and mikevitale.com. Thats what they envision for the airwaves why wouldnt they extend it to the net. By the way wikileaks would be relagated to a maybe status

Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep

its acorns fault - (boxley) - (51) - Aug. 24, 2010, 12:07:24 PM EDT

Let's see if I follow this - (drook) - (50) - Aug. 24, 2010, 12:51:18 PM EDT

you got it :-) - (boxley) - Aug. 24, 2010, 01:11:02 PM EDT

Not necessarily - (beepster) - (48) - Aug. 24, 2010, 01:52:35 PM EDT

I don't see it - (drook) - (43) - Aug. 24, 2010, 02:08:38 PM EDT

Where you stand depends on where you sit - (crazy) - (40) - Aug. 25, 2010, 06:20:00 AM EDT

who is paying the bill? - (boxley) - (39) - Aug. 25, 2010, 08:43:32 AM EDT

Doesn't Net Neutrality help customers? - (drook) - (38) - Aug. 25, 2010, 10:35:13 AM EDT

or... - (folkert) - (37) - Aug. 25, 2010, 11:53:59 AM EDT

it isnt, and they would lose you as a customer to a telco - (boxley) - (36) - Aug. 25, 2010, 12:07:34 PM EDT

Why would the other be any better? - (drook) - (35) - Aug. 25, 2010, 12:20:57 PM EDT

why do you think that is the plan? - (boxley) - (34) - Aug. 25, 2010, 02:47:15 PM EDT

NAF's comments. - (Another Scott) - (33) - Aug. 25, 2010, 03:43:55 PM EDT

correct - (boxley) - (8) - Aug. 25, 2010, 05:02:46 PM EDT

I get my email from my web host, not my ISP - (drook) - (7) - Aug. 25, 2010, 05:22:38 PM EDT

Ditto. We've never checked our e-mail on our Cox account. -NT - (Another Scott) - Aug. 25, 2010, 05:46:07 PM EDT

whoosh, point=missed - (boxley) - (5) - Aug. 25, 2010, 08:24:50 PM EDT

Is that what it means? Really? - (drook) - Aug. 25, 2010, 08:39:42 PM EDT

Specious argument. - (Another Scott) - (1) - Aug. 25, 2010, 08:42:19 PM EDT

so downloading porn == telephone service. okay -NT - (boxley) - Aug. 25, 2010, 08:52:26 PM EDT

QOS is NOT the issue here. - (folkert) - (1) - Aug. 25, 2010, 10:22:17 PM EDT

bullshit greg, you know better - (boxley) - Aug. 25, 2010, 10:59:36 PM EDT

Oh, cool, code words... - (beepster) - (23) - Aug. 25, 2010, 05:23:11 PM EDT

It *is* telecom - (drook) - (22) - Aug. 25, 2010, 05:34:01 PM EDT

Doesn't mean... - (beepster) - (21) - Aug. 25, 2010, 06:14:40 PM EDT

You don't like the USF. Now tell me why it's not a telecom. -NT - (drook) - (20) - Aug. 25, 2010, 06:27:04 PM EDT

doesnt use the AIN so its not a telecom, no a-links needed - (boxley) - (4) - Aug. 25, 2010, 08:28:14 PM EDT

Verizon says you're wrong - (drook) - (3) - Aug. 25, 2010, 08:50:14 PM EDT

federal court said you are wrong, they should know - (boxley) - (2) - Aug. 25, 2010, 08:55:20 PM EDT

Have you read Brand X? - (drook) - (1) - Aug. 25, 2010, 10:22:36 PM EDT

hafta take this offline if you are really interested -NT - (boxley) - Aug. 25, 2010, 11:03:52 PM EDT

I didn't say it wasn't telecom - (beepster) - (14) - Aug. 25, 2010, 09:20:15 PM EDT

Sure, it's all about TAXes. As always. Sure... :-/ -NT - (Another Scott) - (13) - Aug. 25, 2010, 09:32:06 PM EDT

Is that NOT what you think - (beepster) - (12) - Aug. 25, 2010, 10:05:25 PM EDT

Let's see. - (Another Scott) - (11) - Aug. 25, 2010, 10:55:34 PM EDT

Re: Let's see. - (boxley) - (4) - Aug. 25, 2010, 11:02:55 PM EDT

... -NT - (Another Scott) - Aug. 25, 2010, 11:30:21 PM EDT

So you're in favour of letting people starve to death? - (CRConrad) - (2) - Sept. 15, 2010, 11:11:59 AM EDT

point=missed - (boxley) - Sept. 15, 2010, 12:43:09 PM EDT

Considering that you are {unnaturally!} oft better-informed - (Ashton) - Sept. 15, 2010, 04:19:35 PM EDT

Let's see, part B - (drook) - Aug. 26, 2010, 02:35:40 AM EDT

So who will pay - (beepster) - (4) - Aug. 26, 2010, 07:46:02 AM EDT

you already did, part of the stimulus package -NT - (boxley) - (3) - Aug. 26, 2010, 10:49:50 AM EDT

But I also pay - (beepster) - (2) - Aug. 26, 2010, 04:30:19 PM EDT

Poor beepster ... could your taxes be so onerous - (Ashton) - (1) - Sept. 15, 2010, 04:06:23 PM EDT

bwah ha ha - (beepster) - Sept. 15, 2010, 04:23:01 PM EDT

Given rulings on fair use and other new technologies - (beepster) - (1) - Aug. 25, 2010, 01:22:36 PM EDT

We already know what the Telcos et al want to do - (drook) - Aug. 25, 2010, 01:27:37 PM EDT

Any law at all == totalitarianism - (mhuber) - (3) - Aug. 24, 2010, 03:17:15 PM EDT

Bet I got it from someone. I only introduced it to IWT. ^_^ -NT - (CRConrad) - (1) - Sept. 15, 2010, 11:14:47 AM EDT

Nice to see you stop by again. - (folkert) - Sept. 15, 2010, 11:27:59 AM EDT

iwethey.org

What you're selling, I do not need.
67 ms