mailing list archives
Equal capacity for equal pay!
From: David Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2008 12:13:49 -0400
Begin forwarded message:
From: Tony Lauck <tlauck () madriver com>
Date: August 31, 2008 11:36:01 AM EDT
To: dave () farber net, lroberts () anagran com
Subject: Equal capacity for equal pay!
That's it, exactly! "Equal capacity for equal pay." Dispense with the
concept of flow, it really is an upper layer concept that has no place
within the network itself.
I would add one proviso: don't limit utilization unnecessarily. Apply
the rule only when necessary, i.e. when there is competition between
users. If packets from a single user are competing with other packets
from that user, leave any prioritization to the user's gateway or
network. (Or to the parent who can disconnect the kid's computer, the
ultimate embodiment of equal capacity for equal pay.)
With aggregation this way, it then becomes possible to scale the
congestion management hierarchically. Backbones need to know the
utilization of ISPs and their payments. ISPs need to know the
utilization of customers and their payments. LAN managers need to
know the utilization of individuals or departments, etc.
David Farber wrote:
Begin forwarded message:
*From: *"Dr. Lawrence Roberts" <lroberts () anagran com <mailto:lroberts () anagran com
*Date: *August 30, 2008 1:16:14 AM EDT
*To: *David Farber <dave () farber net <mailto:dave () farber net>>, Larry
Roberts <lroberts () anagran com <mailto:lroberts () anagran com>>, dan () lynch com
<mailto:dan () lynch com>
*Subject: **Re: Fwd: [IP] do read !!! Comcast confirms 250GB cap
effective October 1*
Unfortunately, the problem is even worse for Japan and S. Korea. P2P
users are more common, the countries are small so most downloads or
uploads go international, and their High speed symmetric BB links
suffer far worse than our un-symmetric lower speed BB connections.
So they have major economic problems. They have tried DPI even
before us but it cannot find all the encrypted flows now so the
remaining 30% or the P2P users still can operate freely. The
remaining P2P users then spawn more flows and take up the same
80-90% of the pooled capacity. The result is the average user get
very poor service.
However going to a GB cap or a charge per GB is really bad as we
know. But put this down to flailing for a solution in the face of an
extremely bad situation. The Internet cannot stand up to this as
more and more applications discover the ease of getting more
capacity by using more flows.
I continue to believe that equal capacity for equal pay instead of
equal capacity per flow is what we need to move to, since then
congestion will affect us all fairly (as it used to). But how does
one convince the world?
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
- Equal capacity for equal pay! David Farber (Aug 31)