North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical RE: Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors
> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Jared Mauch > Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 7:06 PM > To: Paul Vixie > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 11:32:33PM +0000, Paul Vixie wrote: > What i've done is rate-limit TCP inbound to be around > 75-80% of the link speed to force things to back-off and > leave space for my UDP packet streams. > > I think one of the major problems is that very few > people know how to, or are capable of sending larger g711 > frames (at increased delay, but more data per packet) because > they can't set these more granular settings on their > systems.. this means you have a lot higher pps rates which I > think is the problem with the radio gear, it's just not > designed for high pps rates.. That's interesting. . . where's the intersection of the packet size curve and the latency curve? I mean, where would you set it, and can you offset some of that with fragmentation and intervleaving? I'm outside of that "very few people," but I could imagine wanting dynamic control--one packet size (latency) for a certain calling plan (calls within the LAN, maybe even to anywhere on my network if I control end-to-end QoS, and local calls) but another for long distance. > - jared Lee
|