Bandwidth limitation for certain types of traffic is less risky than dropping packets.

• A. True
• B. False
• C. Both
• D. Neither

Answer: (A)

Controlling congestion by limiting the rate of certain traffic can be safer than letting packets be dropped. When you cap how much data a flow can send, you prevent the network’s buffers from overflowing and avoid sudden packet losses that disrupt ongoing transmissions. This approach keeps latency and jitter more predictable for sensitive services, and it avoids triggering retransmissions that can cascade and reduce overall throughput.

In many protocols, especially TCP, packet loss signals congestion and causes the sender to back off, which can throttle many flows and degrade performance across the network. By using rate limiting or traffic shaping, you keep traffic within a safe bound, reducing the chance of loss and the associated ripple effects. Some traffic, like streaming or real-time communications, can tolerate a little delay but not frequent drops, so limiting bandwidth helps maintain quality better than dropping packets outright.

So, for certain types of traffic, restricting their rate is less risky than simply dropping packets, which is why the statement is true.