Re: [arch-d] [Network-tokens] [Apn] Questions for APN: Q#5

Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net> Wed, 30 September 2020 20:58 UTC

Return-Path: <huitema@huitema.net>
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 69E2A3A0B8B for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 13:58:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.111
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.111 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.213, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
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 EUDw47ZS8k6F for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 13:58:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx43-out1.antispamcloud.com (mx43-out1.antispamcloud.com [138.201.61.189]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E39EF3A0B8F for <architecture-discuss@iab.org>; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 13:58:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from xse306.mail2web.com ([66.113.197.52] helo=xse.mail2web.com) by mx18.antispamcloud.com with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <huitema@huitema.net>) id 1kNjB1-0001z7-Du for architecture-discuss@iab.org; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 22:58:18 +0200
Received: from xsmtp22.mail2web.com (unknown [10.100.68.61]) by xse.mail2web.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C1pW54y5TzDVN for <architecture-discuss@iab.org>; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 13:58:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.5.2.15] (helo=xmail05.myhosting.com) by xsmtp22.mail2web.com with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <huitema@huitema.net>) id 1kNjAv-0001qf-IP for architecture-discuss@iab.org; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 13:58:09 -0700
Received: (qmail 23689 invoked from network); 30 Sep 2020 20:58:09 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO [192.168.1.107]) (Authenticated-user:_huitema@huitema.net@[172.58.43.238]) (envelope-sender <huitema@huitema.net>) by xmail05.myhosting.com (qmail-ldap-1.03) with ESMTPA for <pengshuping@huawei.com>; 30 Sep 2020 20:58:09 -0000
To: Yiannis Yiakoumis <yiannis@selfienetworks.com>, Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>
Cc: network-tokens@ietf.org, =?UTF-8?B?5pu555WF?= <caoc15@chinaunicom.cn>, zhangs366@chinaunicom.cn, architecture-discuss@iab.org, apn <apn@ietf.org>, pengshuping <pengshuping@huawei.com>
References: <2020092211271508522412@chinaunicom.cn> <4FEADB2A-A062-44B4-8D36-3651EBDD1ACD@eggert.org> <a8542256-b0e7-f6d7-abb1-e2f379215849@huitema.net> <kfirxvib.fe0473da-51f1-4bd7-91fe-290064021626@we.are.superhuman.com> <121369D4-F4C7-44E9-9BFC-FA26A7265E98@eggert.org> <kfpoveig.b33d3bb7-44af-4609-b592-1b67e085b0e9@we.are.superhuman.com>
From: Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>
Autocrypt: addr=huitema@huitema.net; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= mDMEXtavGxYJKwYBBAHaRw8BAQdA1ou9A5MHTP9N3jfsWzlDZ+jPnQkusmc7sfLmWVz1Rmu0 J0NocmlzdGlhbiBIdWl0ZW1hIDxodWl0ZW1hQGh1aXRlbWEubmV0PoiWBBMWCAA+FiEEw3G4 Nwi4QEpAAXUUELAmqKBYtJQFAl7WrxsCGwMFCQlmAYAFCwkIBwIGFQoJCAsCBBYCAwECHgEC F4AACgkQELAmqKBYtJQbMwD/ebj/qnSbthC/5kD5DxZ/Ip0CGJw5QBz/+fJp3R8iAlsBAMjK r2tmyWyJz0CUkVG24WaR5EAJDvgwDv8h22U6QVkAuDgEXtavGxIKKwYBBAGXVQEFAQEHQJoM 6MUAIqpoqdCIiACiEynZf7nlJg2Eu0pXIhbUGONdAwEIB4h+BBgWCAAmFiEEw3G4Nwi4QEpA AXUUELAmqKBYtJQFAl7WrxsCGwwFCQlmAYAACgkQELAmqKBYtJRm2wD7BzeK5gEXSmBcBf0j BYdSaJcXNzx4yPLbP4GnUMAyl2cBAJzcsR4RkwO4dCRqM9CHpVJCwHtbUDJaa55//E0kp+gH
Message-ID: <09f1a2da-00bf-208b-6242-7229cb10622c@huitema.net>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2020 13:58:09 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.12.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <kfpoveig.b33d3bb7-44af-4609-b592-1b67e085b0e9@we.are.superhuman.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------F26EAB5C0E59A0320C76FB62"
Content-Language: en-US
X-Originating-IP: 66.113.197.52
X-Spampanel-Domain: xsmtpout.mail2web.com
X-Spampanel-Username: 66.113.197.0/24
Authentication-Results: antispamcloud.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=66.113.197.0/24@xsmtpout.mail2web.com
X-Spampanel-Outgoing-Class: unsure
X-Spampanel-Outgoing-Evidence: Combined (0.10)
X-Recommended-Action: accept
X-Filter-ID: Mvzo4OR0dZXEDF/gcnlw0Z1apovzGPsYhEeBL1aoZmqpSDasLI4SayDByyq9LIhVP6TR/V8VbJhR /l+KK8YJcUTNWdUk1Ol2OGx3IfrIJKywOmJyM1qr8uRnWBrbSAGDeW3+HZ7LK0h6oEMb2VkOa5vM xCtZSe87wnSOA0YTnlDnx8yeplRO3sLIqUlSH7OGhPkipG5N2XqjnnoJIWIxyYMlhcTgOXSCz8qb ysTVYVkMDlXDa3aVnxGK2HywWN/nCEhctdZiIImXrhbY9T9+hpnckpWaLvahyBjmQxBKOztp0ugt Zlkw9p/AQdIE0knw7cPlLc4mPp21O6mudLBF4/IRL+spW60mrWiAEnQcn/qslg3CoCHsPz6pr/Ao kdAPhX8u3xIOOtB59sWJ1mr0rcswIlm249d1OOo21hSM9tXB1/2M1shZO++tsIV90EPuboZD5vPF e84pJQGk5dfbFPdfcXgLzsY3kBHC+ZTZl3S5+IwAWiarTQyLhmI9lhnr3l4BTMsdLA+IUUtrsjBa axEfRPm7RhvF5NbroBPxVOCfU642KNtk4n/u8nyV2xsjehIqUczFWeS6sE8e1b5/Uj/i4hYVfUxI FxiN15g3w5xVgddXYQ3GpyBacgDtpRVbZA8yr1qRCAWu2zVzsr/LJHlAxkSPEbUWPCeUU4Eb3RLG 3DLFovpBcOr3ufYbfO+n7+aVm/NqgKA5dyCxkhdL5g7yNAxIoTne18wgCHBWXWNdeu+6D1xe6+c7 Ft92TZYqm6tYkEIaKUMagHVttkVduKlviaL3AtF7R07Wp86mxvwan9u1XhzpF3vNmn81pQyLZpty X6mOXQb1fbhdFO9pkBxwEiTVJqDh0qKoKsXx5ln2SMMcYcLzHFodDBnL1LUIIlOtorsTzF4ioZG/ TbRsZtbxIx8r0tkGYkfgGWL38RL2RSrvmTNpgdQqU4ccmgaW3jR5NeVaJQBh0uawl0Cg8gkFJY4U lg4VofOxwUi4TVKOKogdFzFUBtke4lHzswE2heUd4UCZPAsMlEWCkNGHtIkd2x35zAiBFPp64JaI ysCWp33KKvSLEepfzmW/VTBD
X-Report-Abuse-To: spam@quarantine11.antispamcloud.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/architecture-discuss/SkAHerQ8j2X3WtLZdRmz84yY5fU>
Subject: Re: [arch-d] [Network-tokens] [Apn] Questions for APN: Q#5
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, 30 Sep 2020 20:58:24 -0000

On 9/30/2020 11:07 AM, Yiannis Yiakoumis wrote:
> Hi Lars,
>
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 12:28 AM, Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org
> <mailto:lars@eggert.org>> wrote:
>
>     Hi,
>
>     On 2020-9-26, at 2:22, Yiannis Yiakoumis
>     <yiannis@selfienetworks.com <mailto:yiannis@selfienetworks.com>>
>     wrote:
>
>         One of the first successful proof-points for SDN was Google
>         claiming that they moved their WAN utilization to ~100%,
>         instead of over-provisioning. It saved them lots of money. Two
>         of the design principles that led them there were
>         i) moving from "all packets are equally important" to
>         "allocate resources based on application-level priorities" and
>         ii) moving from "TCP flows regulated by "fair share"
>         mechanisms" to "measure demands, and shape flows at the
>         endpoints".
>
>     I think these claims were made for Google's private B4 network,
>     right? AFAIK that is a *very* different network from the public
>     Internet. From what I recall, each transfer over B4 is scheduled
>     over the course of a day based on various flow properties that are
>     required to be specified, following some giant minmax-like
>     computation.
>
>
> Yes, this is for B4. While the network is different, the idea that you
> can build a much more cost/performance efficient WAN still stands.

What do you call WAN? Until now, APN was proposed for "limited domains",
which are typically access networks. WAN would imply going further, to
long distance networks used for connections between access providers. Is
that really what you have in mind?

-- Christian Huitema