Re: [lmap] Feedback on draft-nagami-lmap-use-case-measurement-provider

Nagami Kenichi <nagami@wide.ad.jp> Thu, 25 July 2013 17:32 UTC

Return-Path: <nagami@wide.ad.jp>
X-Original-To: lmap@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lmap@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B0DE21F9964 for <lmap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Jul 2013 10:32:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.978
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.978 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 69VnDzdExEP7 for <lmap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Jul 2013 10:32:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sh.wide.ad.jp (sh.wide.ad.jp [IPv6:2001:200:0:1001::6]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3F7B21F995E for <lmap@ietf.org>; Thu, 25 Jul 2013 10:32:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pa0-x234.google.com (mail-pa0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::234]) (authenticated (0 bits)) by mail.wide.ad.jp (8.14.1+3.5Wbeta/8.14.1/smtpfeed 1.21) with ESMTP id r6PHWF1W005111 (using TLSv1/SSLv3 with cipher RC4-SHA (128 bits) verified FAIL) for <lmap@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Jul 2013 02:32:16 +0900 (JST)
Received: by mail-pa0-f52.google.com with SMTP id kq13so2251736pab.11 for <lmap@ietf.org>; Thu, 25 Jul 2013 10:32:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=45JrnRLU3H1/YxR1CKlE3SIp1Qho3WwnRisY1yLoUkk=; b=L/abreYKGw8NwC1qLSwbxVJKkEVUB8mJOglLpcQdnwVU/cw+rcryq6e2kTW4tJserx g8n914St9wH+Ad/dNpGhWeZoiFpUDxW51zQETd+x8sFZpi8klYVsvRQ2q+xYSicJbKW5 l9xw3ksmJ9ybvv/gpMUKKoZzIJ0wftFEjoicszMyHb8+2pLqsRv0bovKWwFtzAUxqYZf nwHhNT3TxON2dvVfWGgT0LnDXSY2KA9EUPPYPjwOViyZeeG+cRE4bSoKLWNMdoHtUqsE eylXjVTJq/2ErlMfVDzmK7aAHn7iYfRcwugm458JqWpxMzRaUS2EgpFzBSPGFrBhlNli VbsA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.68.211.194 with SMTP id ne2mr47906612pbc.40.1374773530636; Thu, 25 Jul 2013 10:32:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.70.102.176 with HTTP; Thu, 25 Jul 2013 10:32:10 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <51ED4150.6070907@cisco.com>
References: <51ED4150.6070907@cisco.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 02:32:10 +0900
Message-ID: <CAMnGr6HeJiJW_bXHFP6E+KtxOAKtUhq4MzWJri+6OTefeb0k=A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Nagami Kenichi <nagami@wide.ad.jp>
To: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Cc: "lmap@ietf.org" <lmap@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [lmap] Feedback on draft-nagami-lmap-use-case-measurement-provider
X-BeenThere: lmap@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Large Scale Measurement of Access network Performance <lmap.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lmap>, <mailto:lmap-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/lmap>
List-Post: <mailto:lmap@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lmap-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lmap>, <mailto:lmap-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2013 17:32:19 -0000

Hi Benoit,

Thank you for comment.

> Next to the points I made regarding to draft-linsner-lmap-use-cases, which
> are applicable here as well, I have one extra point: I like the fact that
> the draft covers the smartphone. This use case is completely different. I
> might not care if a MA generates some packets from my home, but I care if
> this is from my smartphone and my bill is pay per volume. The roaming price
> are still expensive.

I think it depends on the mobile service environment.
If the fee is determined by the amount of traffic as you wrote,
it is difficult that a smartphone becomes MA.
If the fee is flat rate, a smartphone becomes MA.
In our experiment, 2000 smartphones participated as MA
 because the fee is flat rate.

Regards,
Ken Nagami