Re: [gaia] RG Last Call: draft-irtf-gaia-alternative-network-deployments-02

["Jose Saldana" <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

I think the "profit" or "non-profit" characteristic is somewhat included in
the "Goals and motivation" section:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-irtf-gaia-alternative-network-deployments-
02#section-3.2

Thanks!

Jose

> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: gaia [mailto:[e-mail]] En nombre de Nicolás Echániz
> Enviado el: miércoles, 16 de diciembre de 2015 19:27
> Para: [e-mail]
> Asunto: Re: [gaia] RG Last Call:
draft-irtf-gaia-alternative-network-deployments-02
> 
> one last thing...  another way of grouping networks is "for profit" and
"not for profit"
> (academic, community, testbeds, etc.); in my opinion, those run by for
profit
> organizations would fall in for profit category, even if they are free of
charge.
> 
> 
> 
> On 12/16/2015 03:21 PM, Nicolás Echániz wrote:
> >
> > Hello everyone,
> >
> > I am Nicolás Echániz from AlterMundi in Argentina.
> >
> > I'm coming late to this discussion but I'd like to point out that from
> > the point of view of our community networks, I would not use the words
> > "alternative" or "complementary". For some reason, Community Networks,
> > which is the name that is established throughout the CN movement is
> > usually avoided elsewhere. I believe this generates confusion.
> >
> > Community Networks nowadays include networks with their own ASN, where
> > deployment is hybrid wireless + fiber; in fact everything about
> > community networks can be compared to other network models, except for
> > the socio-economical aspect, which is what defines them as "community"
> > and not just networks.
> >
> > Avoiding this is what creates such confusion as believing that
> > Facebook deploying drones around the world (which is clearly an
> > Alternative), can be related to the work done in Community Networks.
> >
> > Regarding the original list of "kinds of networks" being considered:
> >
> > 1 Community Networks
> > 2 Wireless Internet Service Providers WISPs
> > 3 Shared infrastructure model
> > 4 Crowdshared approaches, led by the people and third party
> > stakeholders
> > 5 Testbeds for research purposes
> >
> > These do not all fall into what José explained in a previous e-mail:
> >
> > "we are mainly talking about initiatives driven by the people and
> > local companies. The idea is that people will maintain the control of
> > the network they have created."
> >
> > WISPs for example, can be big commercial entities with no community
control.
> >
> > Furthermore, calling Community Networks "alternative" or
> > "complementary", puts them in a second level status in relation to
> > "mainstream" networks which we are in fact trying to avoid. These are
> > Networks, just like all others, but with communities behind them.
> >
> >
> > To sum this up, I'd say that Community Networks be called just that
> > and if necessary they can be put in their own group, while the rest
> > can be called "alternative" if those involved agree.
> >
> >
> > Well this is just an opinion from our previous experiences trying to
> > name these initiatives.
> >
> >
> > Cheers,
> > NicoEchániz
> > AlterMundi.net
> >
> >
> > On 12/15/2015 07:38 AM, Jose Saldana wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> I also prefer “alternative” for two reasons:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> - I think the word fits better with the networks we had in mind while
> >> writing the draft:
> >> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/gaia/current/msg00984.html. And
> >> IMHO, “alternative” is not the same as “complementary”.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> - A more practical reason: today is the deadline established by Mat
> >> in order to initiate IRSG review of the document. So if we rethink
> >> the title (and probably the whole document), we may lose a lot of
> >> time. I must confess this may sound too “practical”, but we already
> >> discussed a lot about the name to be applied to these networks. See
e.g. these
> threads:
> >>
> >> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/gaia/current/msg00227.html
> >>
> >> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/gaia/current/msg00187.html
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks a lot!
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Jose
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> *De:*Andrés Arcia-Moret [mailto:[e-mail]] *Enviado el:*
> >> lunes, 14 de diciembre de 2015 14:51
> >> *Para:* Javier Simó <[e-mail]>
> >> *CC:* jsaldana <[e-mail]>es>; [e-mail]
> >> *Asunto:* Re: [gaia] RG Last Call:
> >> draft-irtf-gaia-alternative-network-deployments-02
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Dear all,
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> I second Javier, voting "alternative". I think we’ve all agreed on
> >> the name alternative networks because it (mainly) matches an
> >> independent willingness of communities to get connected..
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Andrés
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>     On 14 Dec 2015, at 09:48, Javier Simó <[e-mail]
> >>     <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>     Hello
> >>
> >>     I don't like the word "complementary" for two reasons:
> >>
> >>     1) Something is complementary when there is no competition. But,
why
> >>     not? I don't see why a community network cannot be deployed even if
> >>     it is somehow in competition with a "traditional" existing network
> >>     deployed by an operator.
> >>
> >>     2) The word "alternative" was used focusing on a number of
criteria,
> >>     not only on the non-existance of a traditional network.
> >>
> >>     I vote "alternative".
> >>
> >>     Best regards
> >>
> >>     Javier
> >>
> >>     El 12/12/15 a las 17:03, jsaldana escribió:
> >>
> >>         Hi, Arjuna and all,
> >>
> >>         In my opinion, in order to clarify if "Alternative network" =
> >>         "Complementary network", we should answer two questions:
> >>
> >>         A) Are all "Alternative networks" also "Complementary
networks"?
> >>
> >>         In the draft we are considering five kinds of networks:
> >>
> >>         1 Community Networks
> >>
> >>         2 Wireless Internet Service Providers WISPs
> >>
> >>         3 Shared infrastructure model
> >>
> >>         4 Crowdshared approaches, led by the people and third party
> >> stakeholders
> >>
> >>         5 Testbeds for research purposes
> >>
> >>         In the case of 4, it is clear that they are a "complement,"
> >>         since they share the infrastructure and may reduce the CAPEX of
> >>         the operator.
> >>
> >>         In the case of 1, they may become a "complement". Is this
> >>         currently happening?
> >>
> >>         I don't think that WISPs (2) usually share their infrastructure
> >>         with traditional operators. Am I right?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>         B) Are all "Complementary networks" also "Alternative
networks"?
> >>
> >>         I think for example in the Wi-Fi network of an airport. This
> >>         network can be considered as "complementary", because it may be
> >>         used to offload data from the mobile network. But it is not
> >>         "alternative" (it is not included in the draft), because it may
> >>         be promoted by a traditional operator (not by the people), etc.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>         Any other ideas?
> >>
> >>         Thanks,
> >>
> >>         Jose
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>         El 2015-12-12 13:45, Arjuna Sathiaseelan escribió:
> >>
> >>             Thanks Mat.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>             I have been recently discussing with Roger from Guifi about
> >>             whether community networks should be termed as Alternative
> >>             Networks or should it be called Complimentary Networks
> >>             considering that community networks could end up sharing
> >>             infrastructure with network operators who could see this as
> >>             a great opportunity to access the last mile without a
CAPEX.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>             So is Alternative Networks the right terminology or should
> >>             we have Complimentary Networks?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>             Regards
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>             On 1 December 2015 at 16:28, Mat Ford <[e-mail]
> >>             <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
> >>
> >>                 Folks,
> >>
> >>                 I think it’s time we tried to conclude our work on
> >>                 draft-irtf-gaia-alternative-network-deployments. Jose
> >>                 detailed the changes in the most recent update when he
> >>                 announced the update to the list, so I won’t repeat
> >>                 those here. I have not seen any further discussion.
> >>
> >>                 If you have any concerns or further comments regarding
> >>                 the content of this document, please raise them on this
> >>                 mailing list by Tuesday December 15th. I hope to
> >>                 initiate IRSG review of the document immediately
thereafter.
> >>
> >>                 Thanks,
> >>                 Mat
> >>                 _______________________________________________
> >>                 gaia mailing list
> >>                 [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> >>                 https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/gaia
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>             --
> >>
> >>             Arjuna Sathiaseelan
> >>             Personal: http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~as2330/
> >>             <http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/%7Eas2330/>
> >>             N4D Lab: http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~as2330/n4d
> >>             <http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/%7Eas2330/n4d>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>             _______________________________________________
> >>
> >>             gaia mailing list
> >>
> >>             [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> >>
> >>             https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/gaia
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>         _______________________________________________
> >>
> >>         gaia mailing list
> >>
> >>         [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> >>
> >>         https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/gaia
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>     --
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>     ---------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >>     Fco. Javier Simó Reigadas <[e-mail]>
> >> <mailto:[e-mail]>
> >>
> >>     Subdirector de Ord. Docente
> >>
> >>     ETS de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación
> >>
> >>     D-204, Departamental III
> >>
> >>     Camino Del Molino, s/n - 28943 Fuenlabrada (Madrid)
> >>
> >>     Tel: [phone], Fax: [phone]
> >>
> >>     Web personal: http://www.tsc.urjc.es/~javier.simo
> >>
> >>     _______________________________________________
> >>     gaia mailing list
> >>     [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> >>     https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/gaia
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -
> >>
> >> A/A/
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> gaia mailing list
> >> [e-mail]
> >> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/gaia
> >>
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gaia mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/gaia