Warning: "continue" targeting switch is equivalent to "break". Did you mean to use "continue 2"? in /home/oregon59/public_html/wp-content/themes/Divi/includes/builder/functions.php on line 5892

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/oregon59/public_html/wp-content/themes/Divi/includes/builder/functions.php:5892) in /home/oregon59/public_html/wp-includes/feed-rss2.php on line 8
Video Marketing Services in Oregon http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com Serving Eugene to Portland & Bend to Lincoln City Mon, 23 Apr 2018 22:33:43 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.9.10 Managed Unfairness, a perspective on an Internet Transport, a Quality of Service models – Part I http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/managed-unfairness-a-perspective-on-an-internet-transport-a-quality-of-service-models-part-i/ http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/managed-unfairness-a-perspective-on-an-internet-transport-a-quality-of-service-models-part-i/#respond Sat, 10 Mar 2018 07:27:39 +0000 http://iqtwordpress.azurewebsites.net/?p=149 by Neville Latchman The recent debate regarding the open Internet, net neutrality, and the FCC regulatory framework has been controversial among policymakers and regulators. Net neutrality is an initiative that champions an open Internet, defined as an Internet: “promoting the ability of end-users to access and distribute information and/or run applications and services of their […]

The post Managed Unfairness, a perspective on an Internet Transport, a Quality of Service models – Part I appeared first on Video Marketing Services in Oregon.

]]>
by Neville Latchman

The recent debate regarding the open Internet, net neutrality, and the FCC regulatory framework has been controversial among policymakers and regulators. Net neutrality is an initiative that champions an open Internet, defined as an Internet: “promoting the ability of end-users to access and distribute information and/or run applications and services of their choice.”
The term quality has varying scope depending on the characteristics and elements of the communication system under consideration. The quality of a user’s interaction with services at the human-to-machine interface is appraised by the Quality of Service (QoS) concept. QoS, which comprises the network and the terminal equipment / Customer Premises Equipment (CPE), is measured end-to-end, per service. This is despite the fact that the terminal equipment (and user-controlled local network, if applicable) is usually not managed by the network provider.
For technical purposes, Network Performance (NP) is performance measurement of network portions under an individual provider’s control. Since the strict technical term QoS includes many variables outside the control of the network provider, many other factors impact network performance.
Degradation of network performance may be due to network congestion or targeted throttling of applications. Furthermore, congestion may occur two ways: it is either related to unpredictable situations occurring on an irregular basis, or by an operator’s failure to meet increased traffic load with sufficient capacity enhancement.
Internet access service provides connection to the public Internet and thereby connectivity among end users. Specialized services provide enhanced functionality including: access restrictions, strict service provisioning, and enhanced end-to-end quality and/or security. These service models represent characteristics that demonstrate varying degrees of openness and admission control.

QoS Concepts

Although an end user’s quality of experience including how it provides a potential indicator of network performance is the goal, the main objective for this QoS context evaluation is to identify degradation of service resulting either from congestion or from operators’ practices (e.g., priority given to selected traffic streams over others). Therefore, the approach is not necessarily to use QoS and quality of experience (QoE) concepts as defined by formal standards but to base the analysis on related knowledge to find methods to identify degradation of service.

Internet access including interconnection

The Internet involves thousands of interconnected networks. Network operation is autonomous and is therefore referred to as an Autonomous System (AS)1. Data communications paths within an AS are established using internal routing protocols. For end-to-end reachability through several ASs, an external routing protocol—an inter-Autonomous System routing protocol called the Border Gateway Protocol (BGP)2—is needed. BGP exchanges network reachability information between the ASs for calculating routes and eliminating loops. Routing decisions are determined based on path, network policies, and/or rule sets.
An Internet access service is a service that provides an end user with connectivity to the Internet. To do so, a Service Provider (SP) must operate and maintain an IP network—an Autonomous System as described herein—and connect it to the Internet via BGP. Internet access reaches from the User Network Interface (UNI) to an egress point of the SP’s AS connected to the public Internet. Egress points can be a direct connection to another AS or to an Internet Exchange Point (IXP) where several other global ASs may be reached. Any destination on the Internet is reached either directly through a connected network, or indirectly by routing to a destination via transit networks.
An Internet access service therefore enables the end user:
• to communicate with end users connected to the Internet
• to access content, services, and applications hosted on servers connected to the Internet
• to use content and applications that rely on the communication capabilities of the Internet
In comparison, applications or services on traditional legacy circuit-switched networks are not well integrated within their networks. Within an IP environment, services are generated at the terminal equipment (computer) while relying on the Internet as a transportation platform (also known as the “Network Layer”). The Internet by itself provides only a general electronic communications service.
Applications, services, and their relevant content are decoupled from the (physical and logical) network and can only use available transfer capacity without having any influence on the traffic management mechanisms practiced on it. The network does not interact with the applications; its only task is to convey the traffic according to a predefined policy. The Internet only provides connectivity between the ends executing the application functionality.
Some classic examples include voice-over IP (VoIP) and Skype real-time protocol (RTP) voice services (see Figure 1b). There are many sources of impairment that can affect the resulting QoS and are attributed to different portions of the network chain. The VoIP/RTP applications have certain minimum requirements for IP packet transmission that must be met to provide acceptable quality. If network layer quality is low, the end user will perceive that the VoIP/RTP application provides poor performance. Usually, the end user can neither identify the specific source of impairment, nor the party responsible for it. This must be done with methods that provide objective measures.

 

Network Performance, QoS and QoE

The universal definition of quality is: “The totality of characteristics of an entity that bear on its ability to satisfy stated and implied needs”3. Any part of a data communications system can be such an entity. Depending on the characteristics of interest and the portion of the communications system under consideration, the term quality has varying scope. From an engineering viewpoint, the performance of technical elements and functions are of interest. An end user interacts with the data communications infrastructure by accessing a service, resulting in a perception of the quality of this service. A user-centric perception of quality is given when rating the subjectively perceived service level, while considering context of use and user expectations.
Different concepts of quality are used in telecommunications:
• For technical purposes, concerning assessment and/or analysis of technical functions, the Network Performance (NP) concept is applied
• The users’ interaction with services at the human-machine interface is evaluated under the QoS concept
• The overall acceptability of a service may be subjectively perceived by an end user and expressed in terms of Quality of Experience
The three concepts and their scope of application are shown in the Figure 1c.

Network, terminal and application performance

The user-perceivable degradation of QoS/QoE is caused by either inadequate performance of the IP network, the terminal equipment/end user infrastructure, or a combination of both. Network performance and terminal performance are the building blocks of any end user service. The network(s) provide the connectivity and IP packet transfer capability between network termination points. The terminal equipment sends and receives packets to and from the network via the network adapter (line card). The adapter is controlled by the operating system of the terminal, which includes the implementation of several protocols, the so-called protocol stack. End-to end packet transfer performance is influenced by the performance of the hardware and software of the terminal equipment. Packet transfer capabilities are utilized when running an application. The application software installed on the terminal equipment executes functions at the application/content layer (information processing, content presentation, etc.) above the network layer as indicated in the figure below.

Network Performance (NP) is the ability of a network to provide the functions related to communications between users. Network performance is determined by the performance of each network element. The performance of the network holistically (end-to-end) is the sum of the performance of all single elements and their inter-connections. Network Performance is typically specified by objective performance parameters that are measurable and quantitatively assigned.
QoS is, as mentioned earlier, “the totality of characteristics of a telecommunications service that bear on its ability to satisfy stated and implied needs of the user of the service,” in which “service” is a set of functions offered to a user by an organization. QoS is always end-to-end, and user-to-user. QoS measurements are carried out end-to-end and can be objective (quantitative) or subjective (qualitative) parameters. QoS measurements indicate the performance of functions observable at the end user-interface of the service.
QoE is the overall acceptability of applications or services as perceived by an end user. It encompasses end-to-end system effects including client, terminal, network, and services infrastructure, and is swayed by user expectations and context. Therefore, QoE is measured subjectively by the end user and differs substantially from user to user. Complex statistical algorithms objectively describe the user experience and are contrasted with subjective measurements to determine network performance, QoS and QoE
Network Performance substantially contributes toward end-to-end QoS. These functions depend on the performance of the network elements and/or performance of the user’s equipment. QoS therefore comprises both network performance and non-network related performance.
QoS provides a quality rating of the collective performance of a set of functions that constitute the overall service. For example, in VoIP services QoS relates to the transmission path from mouth to ear. QoE is broader in scope. It is directly impacted by the performance of multiple QoS parameters and user expectations. There is a direct correlation between QoS parameters and QoE. This relationship between the aforementioned typically is estimated empirically and used in two ways: either the expected QoE for a user is predicted by QoS parameter measurements, or the net required QoS is deduced from a given target QoE for a user. As explained, QoS and QoE are end-to-end related; user-to-user or user to-content. QoS is a measure of the performance of a set of functions observable at the user interface of the service. QoE also includes user expectation and context. QoS and QoE observations and measurements can only reflect the quality as it is perceived by the end user, that is, as perceived at the service interface. It is not possible to identify the direct cause of quality degradation in technical terms.
The concepts of QoS and QoE are used to validate whether the standards specified by a Service Level Agreement (SLA) has been met or to determine the quality of a given service and user satisfaction with it. The QoS parameters for each specific service can be specified and measured. By doing so all features of a service can be monitored and verified for compliance against a reference quality level. For further investigation of causes of quality degradation and identification of possible malfunctioning network or terminal elements, a more detailed analysis is necessary. However, this requires access to the network(s) and terminals themselves, to perform specific diagnostic tests.

Conclusion

QoE thus provides a measure of the overall level of customer satisfaction with an OEM/vendor/Service Provider transport and/or application or service. QoE is related to but diverges from QoS, in that it represents the notion that hardware and/or software characteristics can be measured, improved, and even guaranteed. As mentioned, QoE presently utilizes subjective quality assessments as they relate to the user experience over the global Internet Service Provider networks.
Within the Internet, networks support extensive services. These services may have varying QoS requirements based on an end user’s perceptions. New QoS policies are therefore mandated that will adapt the traditional QoS regulatory model to these emerging circumstances. In the next discussion of this series (Part II) we will evaluate a user-centric approach to identifying key factors that would contribute to the development of an ideal QoS framework. This application framework for a user-centric QoS model will be a catalyst for, and critical to the success of, net neutrality as the Internet and its services evolve.

References:

IEEE Communications Society, Can Blockchain Strengthen the Internet of Things, 12/2017
Jaspec, blog.packet-foo.com, Determining TCP Initial Roundtrip Time, 07/2014
ITU, 2001, A Framework for QoS, 12/2011
IEEE Communications Society, Internet QoS in Future Networks: A User Centric Approach, 10/2011

The post Managed Unfairness, a perspective on an Internet Transport, a Quality of Service models – Part I appeared first on Video Marketing Services in Oregon.

]]>
http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/managed-unfairness-a-perspective-on-an-internet-transport-a-quality-of-service-models-part-i/feed/ 0
Is Net Neutrality really good for consumers? http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/is-net-neutrality-really-good-for-consumers/ http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/is-net-neutrality-really-good-for-consumers/#respond Mon, 05 Mar 2018 06:37:20 +0000 http://iqtwordpress.azurewebsites.net/?p=143 Net Neutrality is a controversial topic and something I’ve been following since the early 2000’s when Voice over Internet Protocol or VoIP started to gain popularity. I remember being disappointed when the first rules were enacted back around 2005. I’d just finished a VoIP project with a customer and had to explain to them that […]

The post Is Net Neutrality really good for consumers? appeared first on Video Marketing Services in Oregon.

]]>
Net Neutrality is a controversial topic and something I’ve been following since the early 2000’s when Voice over Internet Protocol or VoIP started to gain popularity. I remember being disappointed when the first rules were enacted back around 2005. I’d just finished a VoIP project with a customer and had to explain to them that when using the public Internet, there is no way to guarantee the voice packets will arrive with acceptable latency or even arrive at all. The public Internet is best effort and that just isn’t good enough for a latency and drop sensitive application like voice.

Fast forward to 2018 and the Obama era net neutrality rules have been repealed, and a recent poll showed upwards of 80% of public opinion in favor of net neutrality and against its repeal. So, when I first thought about forming a company to solve problems that couldn’t legally be solved under previous regulations, I was worried. I was worried that people might hate what I’m doing, that I’d be attacked and or criticized. Basically I was worried that I might be a giant DBag creating a company to profit off of something unethical.

Then, I started talking to people. Ordinary Internet users that really aren’t technical and really don’t have an understanding of how the Internet works. They all experienced poor Internet , choppy audio, choppy video, laggy online video games, among other issues. They all wanted a better Internet and all agreed that they would pay a small fee for a better experience and that it would sometimes be worth it.

Now, don’t get me wrong. Net Neutrality didn’t just happen because the government wanted to protect consumers against some imagined discrimination or wrong doing. There were some bad actors in the history of US ISP’s, blocking of torrent sites, blocking of VoIP calls, and other unethical actions did occur by ISP’s that had conflicting interests. One line of business of the ISP was hurt or threatened by emerging Internet services that just so happened to compete with another line of business. This created a scenario where a conflict of interest existed and some unethical decisions were made and led to the first round of net neutrality regulations.

Net Neutrality is roughly defined as regulations requiring Internet Service Providers to treat all traffic equally over their networks. This sounds good at first, and is probably why polls show how popular it is. But the truth is that not all applications can perform optimally under equal treatment. Some applications like voice, video and online gaming are more sensitive to packet loss and latency than other applications like file transfers that handle packet loss and latency just fine.

So, there should be some middle ground. Obviously we don’t want ISP’s to block websites based on free speech, political content or participate in anti-competitive activities where they slow down a new service that is seen as a threat to an existing line of business. We really don’t want ISP’s to block anything. The Internet should be free and open for all to consume and innovate on. However, because certain applications require preferential treatment, we should also have a method to prioritize those applications. But it would be a horrible idea for government regulators to pick and choose which applications get priority, it would be best for the free market to decide and let consumers choose to pay for priority if they feel it is worth it.

There’s been a recent backlash against the FCC’s “Restoring Internet Freedom” order which essentially repealed Obama-era net neutrality with many senators and congressmen drafting legislation to put net neutrality into the law books. A permanent bi-partisan net neutrality law would bring stability to the industry, and hopefully result in an improved Internet experience for everyone.

If you feel motivated enough, here is a draft letter you can write to your elected officials:

Dear Senator/Congressman,

As you work on permanent net neutrality regulation, please take under consideration these issues:

1. Internet Service Providers shouldn’t be able to block or throttle any of my traffic.
2. Internet Service Providers shouldn’t be able to block any device I choose to connect to the Internet.
3. Internet Service Providers shouldn’t be able to block any application or service I choose to use over the Internet.
4. Businesses and consumers should be able to pay for premium, or “fast lane” service if they choose.

Thank you,
Citizen

The post Is Net Neutrality really good for consumers? appeared first on Video Marketing Services in Oregon.

]]>
http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/is-net-neutrality-really-good-for-consumers/feed/ 0
SAFT presentation http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/saft-presentation/ http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/saft-presentation/#respond Sun, 18 Feb 2018 02:40:35 +0000 http://iqtwordpress.azurewebsites.net/?p=107 IQToken LLC is having a presentation at the historic Grand Theater in Salem Feb. 22  2018.  We will be presenting an opportunity to participate in our SAFT offering.  This will be close door event, invited guests only.

The post SAFT presentation appeared first on Video Marketing Services in Oregon.

]]>
IQToken LLC is having a presentation at the historic Grand Theater in Salem Feb. 22  2018.  We will be presenting an opportunity to participate in our SAFT offering.  This will be close door event, invited guests only.

The post SAFT presentation appeared first on Video Marketing Services in Oregon.

]]>
http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/saft-presentation/feed/ 0
IQToken Now http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/120-2/ http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/120-2/#respond Wed, 14 Feb 2018 04:45:34 +0000 http://iqtwordpress.azurewebsites.net/?p=120 A convergence of technology innovation and events makes the time for IQToken now by Nathan Helfrey 02/13/2018 As I undertake this journey of starting a company that focuses on 2 of my passions in life, Networking and Blockchain, I wanted to take some time to write some of my thoughts on how/why this project is […]

The post IQToken Now appeared first on Video Marketing Services in Oregon.

]]>
A convergence of technology innovation and events makes the time for IQToken now

by Nathan Helfrey
02/13/2018

As I undertake this journey of starting a company that focuses on 2 of my passions in life, Networking and Blockchain, I wanted to take some time to write some of my thoughts on how/why this project is even possible and what problems are solved.

As I see it, there are 5 core trends/events that have lead up to the formation of IQToken LLC. Thank you for your interest in our project and thank you for reading.

Net Neutrality Laws

December 14th 2017 the FCC voted to repeal Net Neutrality rules thus opening up the legal ability for ISP’s to treat traffic differently. Public opinion is heavily against the repeal of net neutrality regulation, however, the truth is that not all traffic on the Internet should be treated equally. As a Network Engineer and Architect for the last 20 plus years, the fact that Internet traffic can’t be controlled, shaped, or prioritized has been a vexing problem. I’ve spent countless hours in meetings with company executives trying to explain this simple fact, that once your packets hit the Internet, it is best effort and there is no guarantee the packet will reach the destination. The simple fact is that all networks have a certain amount of oversubscription architected into them, and this is true of ISP networks. When oversubscription is an inherent property of a network it also means that congestion will occur. This congestion can occur in micro second bursts, which result in packets being buffered and latency spiking or the packet even being dropped.

As a network architect, I’ve designed around this problem by creating large private Wide Area Networks and Metropolitan Area Networks where business critical traffic can be prioritized. More recently I’ve designed “Software Defined WAN”s where dual Internet links are used in an attempt to mitigate the risk of ISP congestion. It is very clear to me that if organizations had the option to ensure end to end quality over their Internet connections that many of them would choose to do so. It is also very clear to me that ISP’s will want to offer this type of service and capture unrealized revenue.

Cloud Computing

To undertake a project like this with out the public cloud would require that private data centers be installed in co-location facilities around the world at a capital and operating cost that would give any start up company pause. By leveraging public cloud, and more specifically Microsoft Azure’s public cloud, everything can be built following a devops and agile methodology. Once developed the core application can then be pushed to 42 different data centers that span the globe offering low latency connectivity into ISP networks where ever they reside.

In addition, public cloud has enabled me to begin building a proof of concept architecture where multiple ISP’s can be simulated with virtual networks containing virtual routers. Microsoft Azure also offers the ability to spin up an Ethereum test network where smart contracts can be programmed and tested prior to push to the main net.

Everything that IQToken hopes to achieve can be built and tested in the Microsoft Azure public cloud.

Serverless Computing

If we take a look at the IQToken project with the end in mind, we need a system that can handle a lot of transactions. How many transactions? It’s hard to say for certain, but current estimates are that there are now roughly 3.2 Billion Internet users in the world, and a certain percentage of those users will be willing to pay for higher priority on the Internet.

Serverless computing, and more specifically Microsoft Azure’s implementation “Azure Functions” allow us to design the core application responsible for scripting changes to ISP routers in a highly scalable fashion. We now have the ability to scale out as large as we need to. This is huge for a start up company like us, we can start small and scale as large as we need to on demand.

Blockchain and Ethereum Smart Contracts

So, what’s the role of blockchain in all of this? Well we need to solve a few problems that crypto currencies are really good at, and that traditional fiat currencies are not so good at. 1st, we need to be able to support micro transactions, that is transactions could cost less than the smallest unit of fiat currency. 2nd, we need to be able to handle international payments, and we can all agree that fiat currency doesn’t do that well. Lastly, we need fast on demand payments given the number of transactions that could be handled in a day.

And then there is the amazing invention of smart contracts, which in a nut shell let us put conditions on payments. In our case, if the ISP has capacity and is willing to sell priority to a consumers’ packets then the consumer will release payment once verification that the priority queue has been configured.

Which brings us to the last of the 5 innovations which make IQToken a possibility and ties everything together.

Open API’s on Network Routers

Over the last 2 years I’ve devoted much of my time to learning about NetConf and RestConf and Python scripting and the automation of network infrastructure . Before open API’s, we could script configuration changes to routers using SSH, but this had a fundamental problem. It was kind of like throwing mud against a wall and hoping it stuck, as there was no feedback mechanism from network device to script to say whether a configuration change was successful or not. Open API’s give us this feedback mechanism, and therefore we can push a Quality of Service configuration to a network router using an automated Azure function, receive feedback if the change was accepted and successful and then use that message as confirmation of the ISP executing on their part of the smart contract, thus releasing payment from consumer to ISP. If the configuration change was rejected or failed for whatever reason, the consumer is then refunded their IQT.

These are the 5 core trends that I believe make a system like the one IQToken is developing possible. The team I’ve assembled are passionate about the project. Our vision is ultimately to build a system that is easy and seamless for consumers as well as network administrators to use and this ease of use will be the focus of my next blog post

The post IQToken Now appeared first on Video Marketing Services in Oregon.

]]>
http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/120-2/feed/ 0
Eva’s http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/evas/ http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/evas/#respond Wed, 27 May 2015 23:13:58 +0000 http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/?p=67 The post Eva’s appeared first on Video Marketing Services in Oregon.

]]>

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Duis non vehicula nibh, vestibulum maximus metus. Proin nunc ipsum, rutrum eget justo at, efficitur feugiat nulla. Vivamus viverra, urna id fermentum dignissim, metus erat tempor magna, vitae euismod metus augue nec diam. Duis tristique at justo vitae scelerisque. Donec a viverra tellus, ut tempus ex. Integer posuere tempus magna ac egestas. Pellentesque ligula neque, tempor sit amet eleifend ut, faucibus ut dui. Pellentesque mollis, velit quis maximus interdum, velit neque gravida sem, a tincidunt orci augue id nisi. In eget cursus lectus. Nam condimentum iaculis ligula sed sodales. Vivamus suscipit lacus nulla, ut cursus ipsum lobortis in. Morbi pulvinar sodales diam, non viverra mauris eleifend vitae.

Praesent vitae massa a velit sodales malesuada. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Morbi at pellentesque lorem. Morbi posuere justo vel purus porttitor commodo. In arcu dui, efficitur tincidunt neque interdum, viverra hendrerit tortor. Nullam a sapien ac enim condimentum luctus. Class aptent taciti sociosqu ad litora torquent per conubia nostra, per inceptos himenaeos.

The post Eva’s appeared first on Video Marketing Services in Oregon.

]]>
http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/evas/feed/ 0
All That Glitters http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/all-that-glitters/ http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/all-that-glitters/#respond Wed, 27 May 2015 23:12:05 +0000 http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/?p=64 The post All That Glitters appeared first on Video Marketing Services in Oregon.

]]>
The post All That Glitters appeared first on Video Marketing Services in Oregon.

]]>
http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/all-that-glitters/feed/ 0
YMCA http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/ymca/ http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/ymca/#respond Wed, 27 May 2015 23:05:56 +0000 http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/?p=61 The post YMCA appeared first on Video Marketing Services in Oregon.

]]>
The post YMCA appeared first on Video Marketing Services in Oregon.

]]>
http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/ymca/feed/ 0
Indigo Wellness Center http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/indigo-wellness-center/ http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/indigo-wellness-center/#respond Wed, 27 May 2015 22:54:59 +0000 http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/?p=57 The post Indigo Wellness Center appeared first on Video Marketing Services in Oregon.

]]>
The post Indigo Wellness Center appeared first on Video Marketing Services in Oregon.

]]>
http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/indigo-wellness-center/feed/ 0
Ross RV & Food Carts http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/ross-rv-food-carts/ http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/ross-rv-food-carts/#respond Wed, 27 May 2015 22:49:02 +0000 http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/?p=54 The post Ross RV & Food Carts appeared first on Video Marketing Services in Oregon.

]]>
The post Ross RV & Food Carts appeared first on Video Marketing Services in Oregon.

]]>
http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/ross-rv-food-carts/feed/ 0
Willamette Valley Grill http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/willamette-valley-grill/ http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/willamette-valley-grill/#respond Wed, 27 May 2015 22:39:42 +0000 http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/?p=51 The post Willamette Valley Grill appeared first on Video Marketing Services in Oregon.

]]>
The post Willamette Valley Grill appeared first on Video Marketing Services in Oregon.

]]>
http://oregonvideomarketingservices.com/willamette-valley-grill/feed/ 0