Re: [lmap] What is broadband?

[Henning Schulzrinne <[e-mail]>]

I would hope that the protocol components are largely independent of the measurement endpoints, but there is indeed a need for somebody (not necessarily the IETF and not necessarily one entity) to define them if measurements are meant  to be comparable. For some private-use cases, e.g., within a large enterprise network or for internal carrier use, that's probably less important. If you believe that protocol functionality depends on defining these "mileposts", I'd be curious if you have examples in mind.

Henning

From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Shane Amante
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 10:24 PM
To: James Miller
Cc: Benoit Claise; Bugenhagen, Michael K; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [lmap] What is broadband?

James, All,

On Mar 7, 2013, at 7:30 PM, James Miller <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
I believe that Henning had commented at some point that the LMAP definition he contemplated had "architecture" as the 'A' element but certainly access is an important piece.  I think one of the problems that has been discussed also on the LMAP and our FCC Next-Gen lists is that a complete view of LMAP performance measurements would implicate elements from the user's laptop, through wireless and other local LAN, carriers access networks, Tier 1 and other peering networks, the application host side and everything in between.  Clearly there would be a lot of technologies included within that functional scope.

I agree that access is important, but not to the exclusion of everything else that constitutes an Internet end-user customer experience or, alternatively, an Enterprise end-user customer experience -- which is what I believe you're saying above?  That's why it will be important to, at some point, figure out *if*, and then how, to try to segment the portions of the end-to-end path that you describe above so we can attribute good or bad performance to a particular portion of the path so that, ultimately, the correct network operator can be contacted to look into the problem further.  I do not believe that this requires us to break down the end-to-end path on a router-hop by router-hop basis, but rather we need to be able to identify 'sign posts' along the path that can correlate well to end-to-end path.

-shane



For reference, in the FCC Measuring Broadband America Program we focused on measurement from the consumers' broadband modem through the carriers network to where it connects to a tier one peering point.  LMAP should be able to address the broad mix of other use cases that would have a mix of other elements and motivations.

Graphic in Report at page 9. http://transition.fcc.gov/cgb/measuringbroadbandreport/2Methodology.pdf
On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Bugenhagen, Michael K <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
The word "access" should be key here as part of the definition provided we are talking about an Internet service, which is the second component.   I don't really  think we are building tests that won't work on smaller pipes so questioning if it really 'broadband' or not is correct IMO.



Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 7, 2013, at 9:41 AM, "Shane Amante" <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
Benoit,

On Mar 7, 2013, at 3:47 AM, Benoit Claise <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
Dear all,

I started to review the drafts, and I will start posting a few questions to the list.
Open questions, clarifying questions, in order to generate some discussions.
Disclaimer: I have not yet read the entire list archive. Apologize in advance if some points have been discussed already.

Here is my first question. What is broadband in the LMAP context?
Is it DSL, cable, ETTH, Fiber to the home?  Is LMAP technology independent?
And I see also "enterprise edge router", "cellular data or satellite" in draft-schulzrinne-lmap-requirements. In or out?
Or do we have in mind a phase approach, starting with the "enterprise edge router" first, and then home network?

Speaking for the network I operate, I'm very much an advocate of saying that "Enterprise Edge Router" is "in-scope".  We would very much benefit from a standards-based measurement enablement and collection regime vs. mostly proprietary, and non-scalable, approaches that exist today.

This is not to diminish the importance of similar test capabilities for residential broadband use-cases.  We absolutely need to work on those, as well.

With respect to priority, my hope is that we do not have to choose to prioritize one over the other.  Rather, I would hope that both can be developed in parallel, because both -- at least, IMO -- have a substantially overlapping set of requirements/features.

My $0.02,

-shane



Interestingly, I don't know what A stands for in LMAP, if it stands for something.
According to http://trac.tools.ietf.org/bof/trac/wiki/WikiStart, the A doesn't stand for anything.
However, looking at the different draft titles, there is some confusion.

   draft-linsner-lmap-use-cases-0 title is Large-Scale Broadband Measurement Use Cases

   draft-schulzrinne-lmap-requirements-00.txt title is Large-Scale Measurement of Broadband Performance

   draft-boucadair-lmap-considerations-00, Large scale Measurement of Access network Performance (LMAP):

      Requirements and Issues from a Network Provider Perspective

Some more discussions, on the mailing list or during the BoF, on this topic would be appreciated.

Regards, Benoit


_______________________________________________
lmap mailing list
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lmap

_______________________________________________
lmap mailing list
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lmap

_______________________________________________
lmap mailing list
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lmap