Re: [Marnew] endpoint consent

[Ca By <[e-mail]>]

On Wednesday, September 23, 2015, Jari Arkko <[e-mail]> wrote:

> One challenge is of course that it is already difficult for the users (or
> even us experts)
> to understand all the exact things that are going on, so providing
> a useful control for the users even on bandwidth may not be easy.
> Let alone more complex settings.
>
> The other issue is that we should be careful about setting the ambition
> level.
> Fine-grained quality of service treatment has not been successful in the
> Internet. What’s the right ambition level, being able to specify detailed
> bandwidth consumption rules? Or the ability to differentiate interactive
> from the non-interactive within one user? The more coarse grained
> you make this, the more likely it is that it can be used by applications
> and understood by users.
>
> Jari


+1 for simplicity

In the last few years i have made my mobile network free of middle boxes
for the majority of traffic.

There is no proxy, there is no firewall, and there is no nat for most
packets. These things have been removed as we have scaled up and i hate to
see folks in an iab meeting codify having these things stay in place like
they cannot be removed.


CB