Re: [arch-d] A Public Option for the Core

Scott Shenker <shenker@icsi.berkeley.edu> Wed, 12 August 2020 18:47 UTC

Return-Path: <shenker@icsi.berkeley.edu>
X-Original-To: architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AEB23A07D4 for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Aug 2020 11:47:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.887
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.887 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, T_SPF_TEMPERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=icsi-berkeley-edu.20150623.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id onlfDP6LvnU6 for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Aug 2020 11:47:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pg1-x533.google.com (mail-pg1-x533.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::533]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7B9853A07BE for <architecture-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Aug 2020 11:47:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pg1-x533.google.com with SMTP id o13so1511060pgf.0 for <architecture-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Aug 2020 11:47:31 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=icsi-berkeley-edu.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id:references :to; bh=+5itNcktwIetpQXMuk1a59B9EedlgnAO9UTuoQBmTfs=; b=1OeYhxjnMdSLgzlMnbcc4hnc8sH5webyaeLfpalqc2DpKHsTcTjqYK8Fa1A2E1nzSs 9I2vhOwod7WIP5sXdW57g4OLUQn2sxlK54OSCuViVDQruT7FkMYPx0d6gnjIZr3OB/ui 0+dbOuaB7pox6x0ggqxOWOr8GrN8S8K14eMl6mc6HGMzf4HrhEBoTtbjq562SOb3xKfv hKfRw6YnJFPxxHLozYVpoW6Xu+NwoAz7gLmCxgoyA23xZTFGU1lwGE2HvBiR+2AX5XsS gyhcSsMybaHao3Dzdm4dgFBzbYnE1+EInxl3GC/9iGk3TA+3cfD0YePNfJjpi8DnJpoo zX2A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to; bh=+5itNcktwIetpQXMuk1a59B9EedlgnAO9UTuoQBmTfs=; b=IfgqMg4J2yDM8EUN3CgqgUQ/loun9W8+gn6tl3NFfELGz56zSP8+Adg+qkRxtjF/M6 uV4HpHJfxcY/BbjcQ8oxhv9dwYB+YZw25u7SzgFjDFi8qRsKwp3ipyMbujw6aRBKIuPp XyDOeIRjeRSIVJJYNViTqHTmGQKQPgHQPiqykR0LPyAdKxbPAToioVuWWUvI0nrkYFN4 hQTaPx553hPdeVSrOAAr53t8IPUn6i4tIDUcUupCDz2xbg4+HdTNcFCKfTibd3yXNxw4 Cj+SUi8gGl8Q01x6oq+eszkC2oqfMsO9fozo6DPZ1gfq9SLZ0ArLA22dGc91uOMjQBlU a79g==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533VsFZ7ds1tEJPeYG/odFSSGVcCol3CDSp2jsp58YRl+LkVupEZ z2Zdi70Gs7MmYD0ThmqC+TL2/g==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwMlbi6EVuAvN9tnSnvxfwE2RdZROR9Q5EhKt0u2Z6WFXgBcYyy2ZJ6lykkKDZMNxCB2y8QoA==
X-Received: by 2002:a62:82c1:: with SMTP id w184mr870323pfd.202.1597258050903; Wed, 12 Aug 2020 11:47:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.1.5] (135-180-3-160.static.sonic.net. [135.180.3.160]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x9sm3164122pff.145.2020.08.12.11.47.29 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 12 Aug 2020 11:47:29 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_ADFC0E42-BA88-43B7-946A-B1B4742B176F"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.1\))
From: Scott Shenker <shenker@icsi.berkeley.edu>
In-Reply-To: <3702d78d-87d9-ac56-6a45-4aa8a0483b5b@huitema.net>
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 11:47:28 -0700
Cc: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, architecture-discuss@ietf.org
Message-Id: <A36B12DA-3FEF-4029-9953-A756B9A9BF7F@icsi.berkeley.edu>
References: <6F47F8A6-CE4D-46B4-852C-702B9B8A5724@eggert.org> <c80bdd1e-eeac-534d-7d2e-e1b04c9144c8@gmail.com> <47EBBED2-2FE9-42B3-BD37-C81DA84A42F8@icsi.berkeley.edu> <3702d78d-87d9-ac56-6a45-4aa8a0483b5b@huitema.net>
To: Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/architecture-discuss/JqudtqC2oRck4Sfumxyg5hVZ6k0>
Subject: Re: [arch-d] A Public Option for the Core
X-BeenThere: architecture-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: open discussion forum for long/wide-range architectural issues <architecture-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/architecture-discuss>, <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/architecture-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:architecture-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/architecture-discuss>, <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 18:47:36 -0000

To avoid misconceptions, I would encourage everyone who is interested to look at the 20 minute video online (https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3387514.3405875#sec-supp <https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3387514.3405875#sec-supp>). Or if you really want to punish yourself, you can read the paper at (https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3387514.3405875 <https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3387514.3405875>).

Christian, the hollowing out of the core is precisely what we are addressing (in the video, it is the first motivating problem). Moreover, we are structuring the POC to encourage competition and open access at the edge. So you may not agree with our proposed approach, but I think we are trying to address the problems you raised!

—Scott

> On Aug 12, 2020, at 8:37 AM, Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net> wrote:
> 
> 
> On 8/12/2020 6:19 AM, Scott Shenker wrote:
>> The world of today is very different from what it was in 1995, particularly in terms of the market forces at work. We discuss our reasoning for why our proposal might become a reality later in the paper (in a section called “Are We Crazy?”), and I would be interested in your reaction. Do you think the market forces we identify might lead to a different result now?
> 
> The market forces are leading to the "hollowing of the core". Last time
> I checked, over 50% of the top Internet servers were served by a dozen
> or less top ASes, belonging to large CDN or large content hosters, both
> of which may well be providing their edge points and delivery networks.
> Your paper does not address that.
> 
> It seems that you are very concerned with market players using access to
> "the core" as a choke point to enforce their own version of "pay to
> play". This has been an issue a few years ago, but I am not sure it is
> an issue now. What I see instead is local ISP making arrangements like
> "zero rating" with large content providers. This is a play with local
> access bandwidth, not with core transit bandwidth.
> 
> We also have evidence of local ISP prioritizing access to Facebook,
> YouTube or Netflix without any commercial arrangement with these content
> providers. Apparently, the reasoning is that "ISP quality" is measured
> by the populace as "can I easily stream this popular content", and so
> ISPs use tricks to improve delivery of the most popular content and
> compete with other ISPs. (I remember these discussions as part of the
> MARNEWS workshop.) That kind of feedback loop is not affected by the
> state of core transit.
> 
>> 
>> More generally, as an academic working on issues related to the Internet, I view it as my mission to identify designs and paradigms that would make for a better Internet, and to explore whether there are plausible paths to such eventualities. We recognize that our proposed change is a long-shot. In fact, almost all attempts to effect large-scale changes in the Internet (whether its design or its structure) are likely to fail.   My responsibility as a researcher is to not let that stop me, and my mission as a member of the Internet community is to try to make such changes happen, despite great odds. I hope that people on this list and elsewhere read this paper in that spirit.
> 
> Bravo! But then, what about a public option for the edge?
> 
> -- Christian Huitema
> 
>