IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [re-ECN] ECN fundamentals pt2/2

"Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo)" <hannes.tschofenig@nsn.com> Fri, 02 October 2009 09:17 UTC

Return-Path: <hannes.tschofenig@nsn.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 789D83A6A02 for <re-ecn@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Oct 2009 02:17:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.248
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.248 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.351, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 rYcHF1pASHD7 for <re-ecn@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Oct 2009 02:17:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from demumfd001.nsn-inter.net (demumfd001.nsn-inter.net [217.115.75.233]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFC363A6A0E for <re-ecn@ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Oct 2009 02:17:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from demuprx016.emea.nsn-intra.net ([10.150.129.55]) by demumfd001.nsn-inter.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id n929J6KV000904 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 2 Oct 2009 11:19:06 +0200
Received: from demuexc024.nsn-intra.net (demuexc024.nsn-intra.net [10.159.32.11]) by demuprx016.emea.nsn-intra.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id n929J64D026921; Fri, 2 Oct 2009 11:19:06 +0200
Received: from FIESEXC015.nsn-intra.net ([10.159.0.23]) by demuexc024.nsn-intra.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 2 Oct 2009 11:19:06 +0200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 12:22:06 +0300
Message-ID: <3D3C75174CB95F42AD6BCC56E5555B4501BE8767@FIESEXC015.nsn-intra.net>
In-Reply-To: <4AC5C3FF.7080407@isoc.org>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [re-ECN] ECN fundamentals pt2/2
thread-index: AcpDQHzTSGFhBg4YR/as2M8j15FNAAAAJVdA
References: <200910020007.n9207Yd9028543@bagheera.jungle.bt.co.uk> <4AC59062.1070700@informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de><200910021028.22079.mirja.kuehlewind@ikr.uni-stuttgart.de> <4AC5C3FF.7080407@isoc.org>
From: "Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo)" <hannes.tschofenig@nsn.com>
To: "ext Matthew Ford" <ford@isoc.org>, "Mirja Kuehlewind" <mirja.kuehlewind@ikr.uni-stuttgart.de>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Oct 2009 09:19:06.0049 (UTC) FILETIME=[63D79B10:01CA4341]
Cc: re-ecn@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [re-ECN] ECN fundamentals pt2/2
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 09:17:42 -0000

When we started the NSIS work on QoS someone was asking me about how the
charging for these things will work out. I responded by saying that
"someone will figure that out later". Very similar to how Mirja and Mat
responded in this discussion. 

The problem with many of these QoS things is that they make a lot of
sense for researchers (but unfortunately not for anyone else). 

Hence, I believe it is important to understand some of these incentive
models since otherwise you end up having another nice technology (again)
that people cannot make us of. Behind all these new protocol mechanisms
are business models hidden that better make some sense. 

Ciao
Hannes

>-----Original Message-----
>From: re-ecn-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:re-ecn-bounces@ietf.org] 
>On Behalf Of ext Matthew Ford
>Sent: 02 October, 2009 12:13
>To: Mirja Kuehlewind
>Cc: re-ecn@ietf.org
>Subject: Re: [re-ECN] ECN fundamentals pt2/2
>
>On 02/10/2009 09:28, Mirja Kuehlewind wrote:
>> 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...
>
>+1. Furthermore, I think we should probably call 'rathole' whenever the
>question of how congestion volume gets translated into 
>commercial contracts or marketing is raised.
>
>Mat
>_______________________________________________
>re-ECN mailing list
>re-ECN@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/re-ecn
>

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email