IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Marnew] Why?

🔓Dan Wing <dwing@cisco.com> Thu, 18 June 2015 17:52 UTC

Return-Path: <dwing@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: marnew@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: marnew@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE6881B2C6E for <marnew@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 10:52:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.21
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
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 MkoctwE06LDR for <marnew@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 10:52:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com [173.37.86.74]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D6CA61B2B1C for <marnew@iab.org>; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 10:52:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=10857; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1434649974; x=1435859574; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id: references:to; bh=rQ/Yuc7O8BLuybjIRAf3fFGHSOgRk1m121+U2gedyhA=; b=SoabhK9iwDmFQ72Pa7L5Oi5dLOmvU0tGj6LuE6uQNUbhN62jBg2KtL8g wmL7iiXNcIpyIXBkWYhSLWoyC95Zzy96gObMWIc17bKO8srUPIc74A5ub UwFyOtQH5yY82PgoYATmEmvA+vrw4QTnpKjJFl4Ui866kIhL8Wt2qGT3g 4=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0BeBQBpBINV/40NJK1cgkVLVF+DHrowKgmBWwEJhS5KAoE7OBQBAQEBAQEBgQqEIgEBAQMBAQEBIApBCwULCxgqAgInMAYTiCcIDa9flkgBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEXi0WFAgQHgmgvgRQFjHOGfYRThniBNUGGNCGPWxEVhBkeMYJIAQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.13,640,1427760000"; d="scan'208,217";a="8406987"
Received: from alln-core-8.cisco.com ([173.36.13.141]) by rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 18 Jun 2015 17:52:53 +0000
Received: from [10.24.105.206] ([10.24.105.206]) by alln-core-8.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t5IHqoc8021428 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 18 Jun 2015 17:52:51 GMT
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_A2CF30F9-4684-4429-A9DD-2FA72E1744DF"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2098\))
From: =?utf-8?Q?=F0=9F=94=93Dan_Wing?= <dwing@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <A4BAAB326B17CE40B45830B745F70F108E06F6C1@VOEXM17W.internal.vodafone.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 10:52:50 -0700
Message-Id: <495D169E-7C17-457E-8201-AF2FA6935B17@cisco.com>
References: <CAD6AjGRFPFmBY1bR_qv4A8KARVVyHmLbF4vJNuA4DSGfB_Tc+w@mail.gmail.com> <A4BAAB326B17CE40B45830B745F70F108E06F6C1@VOEXM17W.internal.vodafone.com>
To: "Smith, Kevin, (R&D) Vodafone Group" <Kevin.Smith@vodafone.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2098)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/marnew/US_YU7MbWqzGlmOjka4P2yfMrDY>
Cc: Ca By <cb.list6@gmail.com>, "marnew@iab.org" <marnew@iab.org>
Subject: Re: [Marnew] Why?
X-BeenThere: marnew@iab.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Managing Radio Networks in an Encrypted World <marnew.iab.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.iab.org/mailman/options/marnew>, <mailto:marnew-request@iab.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.iab.org/mail-archive/web/marnew/>
List-Post: <mailto:marnew@iab.org>
List-Help: <mailto:marnew-request@iab.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.iab.org/mailman/listinfo/marnew>, <mailto:marnew-request@iab.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 17:52:54 -0000

On 18-Jun-2015 06:27 am, Smith, Kevin, (R&D) Vodafone Group <Kevin.Smith@vodafone.com> wrote: 
> Hi CB,
>  
> > Is there a summary of why mobile networks are special and require treatment that is above and beyond dsl / cable / enterprise networks?
> You’re right, this needs to be more explicit. All are regulated networks (mobile/DSL/cable by licencing authority(s), enterprise by company), so for me the key distinction for mobile is radio signal volatility

Does WiFi suffer the same radio issues?

> and rapid ingress/egress to the network.

I don't understand what is meant by rapid ingress/egress to the network.


> The resulting increased packet loss and cell congestion bursts arguably make queue management more important in radio: i.e. queuing the content by type so that it can be delivered according to latency/bandwidth requirements. The content type is harder (or not possible) to infer when encrypted. Would be good to know to what extent this is also a problem in  DSL/cable.
>  
> > I understand spectrum is precious, but so is copper and fiber plants. 
> Agreed, I don’t think that is a valid reason to distinguish mobile.
>  
> > I read the gsma document, but i found it to be unhelpful
> This document was the basis for [1]: happy to take comments/issues at [2].
>  
> [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-smith-encrypted-traffic-management-02 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-smith-encrypted-traffic-management-02>
> [2] https://github.com/Kevsy/encrypted-traffic-management <https://github.com/Kevsy/encrypted-traffic-management>
Nice summary document, thanks.  I don't think I had read it previously, my bad.

-d


>  
> Cheers
> Kevin
>  
> Kevin Smith, Vodafone R&D
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Marnew mailing list
> Marnew@iab.org
> https://www.iab.org/mailman/listinfo/marnew

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email