, provided that the higher-priority queue is empty. FQ was designed to ensure that each flow has fair access to network resources and prevents bursty flows from overconsuming network bandwidth; flows are serviced in a round-robin fashion. WFQ allows a fair distribution of bandwidth by supporting flows with different bandwidth requirements. In WRR, packets are classified according to service class: real-time, interactive, file transfer, and SO on, and then serviced using round-robin. To provide service differentiation to enhance QoS on the Internet, the Internet Engineer- ing Task Force (IETF) defined two models: Integrated Services (IntServ) and Differentiated Services (DiffServ) (Blake et al., 1998). IntServ bases its functionality on resource allocation for individual flows by marking the IP Type of Service (ToS) field to provide QoS guarantees. IntServ uses the RSVP signaling protocol (Woods & Siller, 2006), which sets up and reserves network resources. Despite considerable effort having been put into differentiated services, IPv4, the current Internet protocol, ignores the ToS field and RSVP is challenging to implement in large net- works. Packets incident at network elements are forced to compete with other traffic, with the stark reality that those who make a small contribution to the congestion often have their packets discarded as a result of large bursts caused by larger congestors. The Internet is inherently unfair and awaits a policy that does not penalize responsible users. Recent work has suggested the use of congestion-based pricing to solve these problems (Woods & Siller, 2006). Packet Loss Statistics Internet Protocol (IP) allows three basic communication models: unicast, broadcast, and multicast (broadcast is not used on the Internet). With no ubiquitous form of prioritization, all packets are equiprobably lost. The current Internet Protocol (IPv4) ignores the ToS field, and SO increased delivery probability can only be achieved using overhead information. ATM networks have an inherent method of 