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

Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> Wed, 12 August 2020 13:20 UTC

Return-Path: <eckert@i4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
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 A1FA63A128F for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Aug 2020 06:20:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.117
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.117 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no 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 nftKvP8mNrZt for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Aug 2020 06:20:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [IPv6:2001:638:a000:4134::ffff:40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5FB493A1285 for <architecture-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Aug 2020 06:20:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [IPv6:2001:638:a000:4134::ffff:52]) by faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id B29B9548019; Wed, 12 Aug 2020 15:20:07 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix, from userid 10463) id AA5FF440059; Wed, 12 Aug 2020 15:20:07 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 15:20:07 +0200
From: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>
To: Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net>
Cc: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, architecture-discuss@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20200812132007.GO62842@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
References: <6F47F8A6-CE4D-46B4-852C-702B9B8A5724@eggert.org> <c80bdd1e-eeac-534d-7d2e-e1b04c9144c8@gmail.com> <5AA852D6-585E-48A6-975D-D45A9B8D551E@puck.nether.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5AA852D6-585E-48A6-975D-D45A9B8D551E@puck.nether.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/architecture-discuss/zJjK668newsPBQ-_oQEpYka6gbw>
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 13:20:16 -0000

Inline

On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 08:08:23AM -0400, Jared Mauch wrote:
> > On Aug 11, 2020, at 6:53 PM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > Maybe it's time to update https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-carpenter-metrics
> > Reactions to that draft from the then major transit ISPs were interestingly
> > negative.
> 
> Looking at this 20+ years in the future, there???s some interesting dynamics going on, which many of us are interested in for the centralization discussions that are ongoing.
> 
> There???s the usual last-mile vs major city dynamics at play when it comes to cost.  Construction is expensive, but the fiber isn???t the expensive bit, it???s the dirt movement that costs quite a bit.
> 
> With more traffic traversing private backbones vs public ones, there is also a lack of measurements that are feasible.  You can???t measure from within the Akamai backbone as it???s our private network.  Public networks, you can utilize things like RIPE Atlas or similar, but there are significant limitations to it.  Cellular network measurement either require some applications at scale that run in the background, but the various charging cultures that exist globally around voice/sms/data pose challenges.

At the same time, operators try to make money by selling data about their customers
including amounts of traffic or even location on a mobile network. 

> Public sources of routing data are generally available from the major backbones (route-views, ripe ris, etc) but not for the private clouds (Microsoft, google, amazon, ovh, ibm/oracle).  
>
> The costs of running these backbones are often much lower than public and allow us to optimize for our business use cases in a way a public network can???t solve for everyone.

Indeed, in many cases a lot of business including that from Akamai is built on
expoiting value from underlying infrastructure by layering on top of it
and creating a service that sells at a higher margin. Often by market
vertical monopolization financed for years on loss by large investments to
grow and replace competition before the service breaks even.

Aka: Internet technologies have enabled a food chain not unlike the one
we see in biology where arguably the human species is on top. And like the
humans, one can argue that companies on the top of the vertical internet
food chain also destroy the eco system they exploit.

The Internet economy is quite the darwinistic playground. Lets see how
long it will take to realize the need for an evolution beyond that. Like
wee did for most other infrastructures and aspects of economy.

> This is in part a natural economic progression.  Why cloud computing?  Because power is expensive at my house, so I put data on a VM somewhere else for $5/mo.  If I put it in a colocation facility I may pay up to 2500/mo for colocation plus the server and bandwidth costs, plus then I have to deal with swapping failed disk vs $5/mo as a service.
> 
> We don???t often talk about these economic factors that drive the shift, but look at the architecture.  It???s not devoid of economic costs or impacts.  Someone is paying for all that compute at Google/Facebook and power, it???s often not a direct expense we see, like we don???t see the credit card fees that merchants pay.

If the "We" means IETF, i agree, and it would be lovely if we would have more
of an economic discussion track.

> Why are things like neutral IX not successful?  It requires people to sacrifice and value their time very low.  It???s not a surprise that some of the larger IX points operate their own networks to extend their reach (their own private backbones).  Not everyone can interconnect at the speeds necessary at the neighborhood level, there must be some aggregation and it may not be close.

Wondering: 

I am sure you can study how to build roads and highways somewhere. Is there any
public study course for these core aspects of the Internet economy ? Is there
even enough public data to build such course work ?

> My personal telecom expenses are relatively fixed over time, but the bits/second tend to go up over time.
> 
> I am hoping speeds continue to go up, costs go down and the risk of centralization of the network follows the same risk evaluations that people have done in 2020 with their supply chain risks and how they were often centralized.  Diversity is helpful, but if we are always driving for the lowest cost as a consumer, it will take a few shocks to restore that diversity and supply chain depth and balance the ecosystem.

I think we already have good steps beyond network darwinism on crucial points
in some countries. Such as the last-mile subscriber ownership model to create
more LMA competition and even diversity. And we see a lot of darwinism to
counter such trends, such as the history of DSL vectoring to further
monopolization.

I am more excited/worried about access than core, and when i am worried about
core it is more about the IMHO complete unkown best balance between transparency
and lawfulness. The old Internet meme "complying to all regulations by
offering services from another country" is still a core unresolved problem
statement, and a POC from a single country doesn't change that.

Toerless

> 
> - jared
> _______________________________________________
> Architecture-discuss mailing list
> Architecture-discuss@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/architecture-discuss

-- 
---
tte@cs.fau.de