[gaia] controversial paper for CNs

Arjuna Sathiaseelan <arjuna.sathiaseelan@cl.cam.ac.uk> Thu, 17 December 2015 02:00 UTC

Return-Path: <arjuna.sathiaseelan@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: gaia@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gaia@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52AF71A92F6 for <gaia@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Dec 2015 18:00:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.277
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.277 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZFWP-kmCMB3l for <gaia@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Dec 2015 18:00:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lf0-x22f.google.com (mail-lf0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::22f]) (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 93F941A92E0 for <gaia@irtf.org>; Wed, 16 Dec 2015 18:00:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lf0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id l133so41942412lfd.2 for <gaia@irtf.org>; Wed, 16 Dec 2015 18:00:13 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=/CFPqaKf7IajeRgG1r+mXd98S/yBQrzwAfgvU1OmWTk=; b=MTMtAwAp4jSN/UZBuQDKqHUxPVCcwgFW9Vqn14okpnRk6ZqWKEM4uo+GrN9EbQskt3 uOHUJ26ehcJEfaMaa4C9hbTtvY72sq5XNMrLzmRSHP4oegdHKQpXoMekWmK0NNEW3j+f bVtcqhwKW9bBBQ9nxCeOxpcAszeu4cKDeos8UxWV8dLjreu7LORtImN6sWejQOt+myMs 5lVcXcXqXpkO0tuN74d04k0gzXbApfLmFoWPxC0PATBrQmB3V8TAIFx04bsmDBow/Y6Q blyDr039yp2AejRLj2g65PvAiCLduHjKxJ5UXt/7D3p1Q9Aa+6jq+J5Poy9KqfKHo4oT 5cQw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by with SMTP id l62mr20059590lfe.64.1450317611698; Wed, 16 Dec 2015 18:00:11 -0800 (PST)
Sender: arjuna.sathiaseelan@gmail.com
Received: by with HTTP; Wed, 16 Dec 2015 18:00:11 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2015 02:00:11 +0000
X-Google-Sender-Auth: QFiLjY9GVpa-OGJH9KcbVS3BnCs
Message-ID: <CAPaG1AmFArE4MbY8bi3VmAJHotagfApxs6EfsuFFBKk=ZuLe-A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Arjuna Sathiaseelan <arjuna.sathiaseelan@cl.cam.ac.uk>
To: gaia <gaia@irtf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113dbf140e948405270e6216
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gaia/_zHHNJ873dR4HHNKOQnPZu1_xSI>
Subject: [gaia] controversial paper for CNs
X-BeenThere: gaia@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Global Access to the Internet for All <gaia.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/gaia>, <mailto:gaia-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gaia/>
List-Post: <mailto:gaia@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gaia-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/gaia>, <mailto:gaia-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2015 02:00:15 -0000

thought I will ignite some discussions on this paper which I think makes
some controversial claims on the role mesh networks for enabling
connectivity especially with the success of CNs around the globe:

they state: "Our conclusions are intentionally controversial to stimulate a
discussion among researchers and industry. We argue that wireless mesh
networks will not be deployed for user access—at least from an economic
point of view. Instead, they will be financed to increase the automation of
remotely controlled devices, such as meters for gas or heating, parking
meters, and traffic lights, whereas the financial contributions of users
will be dismal."

if the authors revisited this paper now - what would change?

Looking forward to hear from the community network folks :)


Arjuna Sathiaseelan
Personal: http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~as2330/
N4D Lab: http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~as2330/n4d