Re: [httpstreaming] [conex] [dispatch] Q-HTTP

> -----Original Message-----
> From: conex-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:conex-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
> Of Mikael Abrahamsson
> Sent: 11 November 2010 19:02
> To: DIAZ VIZCAINO, LUIS MIGUEL (LUIS MIGUEL)
> Cc: dispatch@ietf.org; httpstreaming; conex@ietf.org; Ingemar Johansson
> S; Kathy McEwen; Mike Hammer (hmmr); GARCIA ARANDA, JOSE JAVIER (JOSE
> JAVIER)
> Subject: Re: [conex] [dispatch] [httpstreaming] Q-HTTP
> 
> 
> > - Enables network operators to generate more revenue for
> > "over-requirements". I dont think real-time was in mind whe Internet
> was
> > created and we need to provide ISPs with new tools like this.
> 
> "over-requirement" as in "I want to actually get what you promised to
> deliver to me"?
> 
> I don't buy it.

Mikael - I think you already put your finger on the problem when you pointed
out that in your country ISPs are obliged to only promise customers what
they can reasonably deliver. In most of the world ISPs are still marketing
"Up to 8 Mbps" or "Up to 20Mbps" for services that at peak, for ~10% of
customers can manage ~6.5Mbps and 18Mbps respectively, with most customers
getting half that, and where the backhaul capacity is 10s of kbps per user
(contention ratios of ~100 to 1). 

What has gone wrong for ISP business models is that the world has changed,
with streaming and interactive services overtaking bulk transfer and web
browsing. ConEx may at times appear to be operator centric, but in many
places it is the customers that are suffering because ISPs are forced to use
pretty crude mechanisms to try and control the small percentage of heavy
users. Clearly everyone must benefit if background bulk data transfers move
to something like LEDBAT? But currently the operators treat that just the
same as any other P2P traffic so no-one benefits.

There is also the issue of fair allocation of upgrades. Obviously if an ISP
spends a lot of money on increasing their backhaul then this money has to
come from the customers. However as things stand the 20% of customers
grabbing 80% of the network will also grab 80% of this increased capacity,
so they are being even more heavily cross-subsidised. Clearly cross-subsidy
is always going to happen to an extent so long as you have flat fees for
access (even if you put in tiered fees, there is still cross-subsidy). But
this should not be excessive else customers suffer.

Toby

> 
> --
> Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se
> _______________________________________________
> conex mailing list
> conex@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/conex