vices through a managed IP network part in the mobile network, such as VoLTE or mobile IPTV (both are provided with assured QoS, via a managed IP network, i.e. not via mobile IAS). ISPs that make wholesale purchases of access networks from the network providers (e.g. other fixed and mobile operators in the given country) may have less control over traffic management and with that the QoS provided to their customers. Various content and application providers naturally want to prioritize their data deliv- ery where possible. Such global providers build their own content delivery networks; however, their services are provided over fixed or mobile IAS on the basis of network neutrality. So, placing the CDN nodes as close as possible to ISPs' networks increases the QoS for their services. ISPs can also have revenues from wholesale offering of bandwidth on the side of CDN data centers (which are on the opposite side of the access part from the viewpoint of the ISPs). One may conclude that traffic management in respect of QoS and network neutrality is directly related to telecom operators' businesses. To optimize resource utilization in different part of the networks (e.g. core network, interconnection points), the possible tool is differentiation of applications regarding traffic management, which can be done in two main ways [4]: Application-agnostic traffic management. All applications are treated in a similar manner (e.g. IP packets from all OTT applications put in the same forwarding queue). Application-specific traffic management. Individual applications are treated differ- ently. For example, torrent traffic is throttled or video traffic is shaped, while voice traffic is not. In developed ICT/telecom markets, the prices for both fixed and mobile broadband and ultra-broadband services are not fixed at any particular level, but rather they appear to respond to normal forces of supply and demand by operators. So, in broadband markets where competition is developed and effective, "dirt road" effects (with lower QoS f