[hops] Types of access network where traversal is problematic
Bob Briscoe <bob.briscoe@bt.com> Mon, 23 March 2015 12:29 UTC
Return-Path: <bob.briscoe@bt.com>
X-Original-To: hops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 016661A88EA for <hops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 05:29:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.068
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.068 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DATE_IN_PAST_06_12=1.543, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=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 cs9ummY_fQpL for <hops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 05:29:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hubrelay-rd.bt.com (hubrelay-rd.bt.com [62.239.224.98]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 031061A88E3 for <hops@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 05:29:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from EVMHR01-UKBR.domain1.systemhost.net (193.113.108.40) by EVMHR65-UKRD.bt.com (10.187.101.20) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.181.6; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 12:29:47 +0000
Received: from EPHR01-UKIP.domain1.systemhost.net (147.149.196.177) by EVMHR01-UKBR.domain1.systemhost.net (193.113.108.40) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.348.2; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 12:29:44 +0000
Received: from bagheera.jungle.bt.co.uk (132.146.168.158) by EPHR01-UKIP.domain1.systemhost.net (147.149.196.177) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.181.6; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 12:29:43 +0000
Received: from BTP075694.jungle.bt.co.uk ([10.111.178.37]) by bagheera.jungle.bt.co.uk (8.13.5/8.12.8) with ESMTP id t2NCSxsp013337 for <hops@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 12:29:14 GMT
Message-ID: <201503231229.t2NCSxsp013337@bagheera.jungle.bt.co.uk>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2015 03:45:19 +0000
To: hops@ietf.org
From: Bob Briscoe <bob.briscoe@bt.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.56 on 132.146.168.158
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hops/wkphUvn93rycAbxfdSxbNjEl_40>
Subject: [hops] Types of access network where traversal is problematic
X-BeenThere: hops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Measuring deployability of new transport protocols <hops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/hops>, <mailto:hops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hops/>
List-Post: <mailto:hops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:hops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hops>, <mailto:hops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2015 12:29:51 -0000
HOPSters, To illustrate that measuring fixed (residential broadband and hosted) sites would give an optimistic view, here's a visualisation of part of the problem by type of access network, using the data set Michio Honda made available to complement his excellent paper. It's on slide 2 here: <http://www.bobbriscoe.net/presents/1501iab-semi/1501briscoe-inner-space-semi.pdf> Or other formats and background links via here: <www.bobbriscoe.net/present.html#1501semi-inner-space> Bob ________________________________________________________________ Bob Briscoe, BT