Re: [re-ECN] Evidence of slow network (WAS Re: Comments on "congestionexposure problem" document)

Hi

Indeed the words 
ISP +throttle 
in the search field revealed quite some information + some hints on how
to avoid being throttled :-). The problem seems to be related to p2p but
still I see it as some kind of  evidence that operators try to battle
congestion.

/Ingemar

> -----Original Message-----
> From: louise.burness@bt.com [mailto:louise.burness@bt.com] 
> Sent: den 1 oktober 2009 13:45
> To: Ingemar Johansson S; re-ecn@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: [re-ECN] Evidence of slow network (WAS Re: 
> Comments on "congestionexposure problem" document)
> 
> 
> If you Google the words ISP and throttle together, you should 
> find a lot of people complaining about being throttled by 
> their ISPs , although I can't find anything that would make a 
> scientific reference
> 
> You may also find that the degree of the problem is country dependent
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: re-ecn-bounces@ietf.org
> > [mailto:re-ecn-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ingemar Johansson S
> > Sent: 01 October 2009 07:34
> > To: re-ecn@ietf.org
> > Cc: Ingemar Johansson S
> > Subject: [re-ECN] Evidence of slow network (WAS Re: Comments on 
> > "congestionexposure problem" document)
> > 
> > Hi
> > 
> > I change the subject line , perhaps somebody else on the 
> list can find 
> > a good refernce to strengthen the last sentence in para 1 
> section 5.1 
> > "The main effect of this has been that users now routinely 
> see their 
> > network connections running slow in the evenings"
> > 
> > I believe the problem exist and I am not worried about my 
> own comments 
> > but I can imagine that some people may claim that this WG 
> is going to 
> > solve a problem that does not exist.
> > Sorry if I keep nagging but I see a risk that the BoF 
> discussion may 
> > evolve around the question "do we have a real problem to solve?"
> > 
> > I had a look at the CoNEXT contribution, while it describes the 
> > traffic growth I don't really see any mention about problems with 
> > people experiencing slow networks. I guess it is perhaps 
> difficult to 
> > find this info (operators are not likely to publish this kind of 
> > reports externally).
> > 
> > One comment to the last version of the doc. Section 5.1, para
> > 1 contains a reference to a blog. I see the blog text mainly as a 
> > discussion around traffic growth, and not about problems with slow 
> > networks, so it would therefore be better to move the 
> refernce to the 
> > sentence before.
> > 
> > Regards
> > Ingemar
> > 
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: re-ecn-bounces@ietf.org
> > > [mailto:re-ecn-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> > re-ecn-request@ietf.org
> > > Sent: den 30 september 2009 15:48
> > > To: re-ecn@ietf.org
> > > Subject: re-ECN Digest, Vol 7, Issue 192
> > > 
> > > If you have received this digest without all the 
> individual message 
> > > attachments you will need to update your digest options in
> > your list
> > > subscription.  To do so, go to
> > > 
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/re-ecn
> > > 
> > > Click the 'Unsubscribe or edit options' button, log in, and
> > set "Get
> > > MIME or Plain Text Digests?" to MIME.  You can set this option 
> > > globally for all the list digests you receive at this point.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Send re-ECN mailing list submissions to
> > > 	re-ecn@ietf.org
> > > 
> > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> > > 	https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/re-ecn
> > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> > > 	re-ecn-request@ietf.org
> > > 
> > > You can reach the person managing the list at
> > > 	re-ecn-owner@ietf.org
> > > 
> > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is 
> more specific 
> > > than "Re: Contents of re-ECN digest..."
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Today's Topics:
> > > 
> > >    1. Re:  Comments on "congestion exposure problem" document
> > >       (toby.moncaster@bt.com)
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > 
> > > Message: 1
> > > Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2009 14:48:25 +0100
> > > From: <toby.moncaster@bt.com>
> > > Subject: Re: [re-ECN] Comments on "congestion exposure problem"
> > > 	document
> > > To: <ingemar.s.johansson@ericsson.com>om>,	<re-ecn@ietf.org>
> > > Message-ID:
> > > 	
> > > <AEDCAF87EEC94F49BA92EBDD49854CC70D49329B@E03MVZ1-UKDY.domain1
> > > .systemhost.net>
> > > 	
> > > Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"
> > > 
> > > Hi Ingemar,
> > > 
> > > There is a reasonably recent paper from Kenjiro Cho et 
> al. in Japan 
> > > that includes data that shows a marked pattern of peak 
> and off-peak 
> > > traffic in residential networks. It is called "Observing Slow 
> > > Crustal Movement in Residential Traffic"
> > > and was presented at CoNEXT last year. 
> > > 
> > > Is this the sort of reference that would convince you 
> that the slow 
> > > network is down to traffic volume as much as server load?
> > > 
> > > 1 comment inline
> > > 
> > > Toby
> > > 
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Ingemar Johansson S
> > [mailto:ingemar.s.johansson@ericsson.com]
> > > > Sent: 30 September 2009 07:54
> > > > To: re-ecn@ietf.org
> > > > Cc: Moncaster,T,Toby,DER3 R; Ingemar Johansson S
> > > > Subject: RE: Comments on "congestion exposure problem" document
> > > > 
> > > > Hi
> > > > 
> > > > I read through the latest "congestion exposure problem" document
> > > > 
> > > > A few comments:
> > > > 
> > > > Section 5.1, last sentence in first para: "The main effect
> > > of this has
> > > > been that users now routinely see their network
> > connections running
> > > > slow in the evenings"
> > > > From a laymans perspective I can probably agree with this, I
> > > experience
> > > > it every now than then when I "surf the internet" from
> > home. I have
> > > > however not been able to determine for sure if the problem
> > > is in the
> > > > network or in the webservers. I would believe that a 
> reference to 
> > > > scientific paper or mailing list discussion or whatever
> > > that describes
> > > > this problem would be beneficial.
> > > > 
> > > > Section 6 (Use cases):
> > > > Maybe obvious (and maybe does not fit into the use cases)
> > > but as I see
> > > > it the future results of this WG would be to provide mainly the 
> > > > operators with at least one of the tools necessary to give
> > > e.g content
> > > > providers and application developers a sustainable "carrot
> > > and whip" 
> > > > offer. "Make your traffic behave according to these rules
> > > and you're
> > > > granted access to our network". I have no opinion regarding
> > > what kinds
> > > > of traffic this would include, I guess time will tell,
> > but the main
> > > > task for the WG should be to provide with one important
> > item to the
> > > > "carrot and whip" toolbox.
> > > 
> > > Whilst this is indeed one possible outcome of this work, 
> I am keen 
> > > at present to show this in an entirely neutral light until more 
> > > people have a better understanding of the impact of this new 
> > > paradigm...
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > PS.. Resent as the first effort looked like crap on the list
> > > > 
> > > > Regards
> > > > /Ingemar
> > > 
> > > 
> > > ------------------------------
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > re-ECN mailing list
> > > re-ECN@ietf.org
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/re-ecn
> > > 
> > > 
> > > End of re-ECN Digest, Vol 7, Issue 192
> > > **************************************
> > > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > re-ECN mailing list
> > re-ECN@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/re-ecn
> > 
> 