Re: [re-ECN] ECN fundamentals pt2/2 (was: Re: Name for BoF?)

"Joe Babiarz" <jbabiarz@istop.com> Fri, 02 October 2009 15:01 UTC

Return-Path: <jbabiarz@istop.com>
X-Original-To: re-ecn@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: re-ecn@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23CC53A684F for <re-ecn@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Oct 2009 08:01:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.27
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.27 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.465, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8aDkVRlpJCm3 for <re-ecn@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Oct 2009 08:01:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cat.cia.com (cat.cybersurf.net [209.197.145.185]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AE853A676A for <re-ecn@ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Oct 2009 08:01:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from i209-195-104-32.cia.com ([209.195.104.32] helo=Joe) by cat.cia.com with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Mtjeb-000088-Ff; Fri, 02 Oct 2009 09:02:41 -0600
From: "Joe Babiarz" <jbabiarz@istop.com>
To: <philip.eardley@bt.com>, <mirja.kuehlewind@ikr.uni-stuttgart.de>, <re-ecn@ietf.org>, <menth@informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de>
References: <200910021028.22079.mirja.kuehlewind@ikr.uni-stuttgart.de> <4A916DBC72536E419A0BD955EDECEDEC063638BB@E03MVB1-UKBR.domain1.systemhost.net>
In-Reply-To: <4A916DBC72536E419A0BD955EDECEDEC063638BB@E03MVB1-UKBR.domain1.systemhost.net>
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 11:02:44 -0400
Message-ID: <001201ca4371$660ec590$322c50b0$@com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: AcpDOlEVoUU3UAUhT+KpRMIF8zfg+AAAtVQwAAzNAeA=
Content-language: en-us
Subject: Re: [re-ECN] ECN fundamentals pt2/2 (was: Re: Name for BoF?)
X-BeenThere: re-ecn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: re-inserted explicit congestion notification <re-ecn.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/re-ecn>, <mailto:re-ecn-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/re-ecn>
List-Post: <mailto:re-ecn@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:re-ecn-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/re-ecn>, <mailto:re-ecn-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2009 15:01:22 -0000

Would like to add that the protocol should be designed so that it does not
discourage ISPs from increasing capacity of their networks. We do not want
ISPs be making more money because their network is congested.

Regards, Joe.
jbabiarz@istop.com

-----Original Message-----
From: re-ecn-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:re-ecn-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
philip.eardley@bt.com
Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 5:08 AM
To: mirja.kuehlewind@ikr.uni-stuttgart.de; re-ecn@ietf.org;
menth@informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de
Subject: Re: [re-ECN] ECN fundamentals pt2/2 (was: Re: Name for BoF?)

I agree.

In practice I guess that the consumer will have a choice between (say) 3
tiers of service (basic, plus, super advanced). although different monthly
congestion allowances (& maybe difference maximum congestion rates) will be
part of that, most consumers won't really understand it (just as today most
don't understand what 20mb/s or 1gb mean). But there are independent experts
that check comparative performance of different ISPs, and you can run a
program to check what performance you actually get.



-----Original Message-----
From: re-ecn-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:re-ecn-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
Mirja Kuehlewind
Sent: 02 October 2009 09:28
To: re-ecn@ietf.org; menth@informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de
Subject: Re: [re-ECN] ECN fundamentals pt2/2 (was: Re: Name for BoF?)

Hi Michael,

On Friday 02 October 2009 07:32:18 Michael Menth wrote:
> Apart from that, I wonder whether a monthly congestion allowance or a
> maximum congestion rate can be sold to the customer because that is more
> abstract and harder to verify for the user. Even I do not know what I
> get for a congestion allowance of 1 MB/month or a maximum congestion
> rate of 10 KB/s. That was one of the criticisms I've heard when
> discussing about re-feedback. Opinions?
>
I don't see that you have to sell the congestion rate to the costumer. It's 
just one part of the contract which will have some more or less meaningful 
names like "fast access" or "high speed access". People don't know what the 
max. access speed in todays contracts means neither...

Mirja



-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Dipl.-Ing. Mirja Kühlewind
Institute of Communication Networks and Computer Engineering (IKR)
University of Stuttgart, Germany
Pfaffenwaldring 47, D-70569 Stuttgart

web: www.ikr.uni-stuttgart.de
email: mirja.kuehlewind@ikr.uni-stuttgart.de
tel: +49(0)711/685-67973
-------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
re-ECN mailing list
re-ECN@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/re-ecn
_______________________________________________
re-ECN mailing list
re-ECN@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/re-ecn
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.14.3/2409 - Release Date: 10/02/09
06:46:00