[Spud] No. Operators don't need SPUD for mobile network management

Frode Kileng <frodek@tele.no> Thu, 21 July 2016 12:42 UTC

Return-Path: <frodek@tele.no>
X-Original-To: spud@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: spud@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77C3A12DAE7 for <spud@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Jul 2016 05:42:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.288
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.288 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.287] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 5DxTfPWFgcsH for <spud@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Jul 2016 05:42:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gorgon.tele.no (gorgon.tele.no [193.156.17.70]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CCE712DA69 for <spud@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Jul 2016 05:42:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=[IPv6:::1]) by gorgon.tele.no with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <frodek@tele.no>) id 1bQDKF-0006jL-2Y for spud@ietf.org; Thu, 21 Jul 2016 14:43:39 +0200
To: spud@ietf.org
From: Frode Kileng <frodek@tele.no>
Message-ID: <43a39476-9327-87ef-204c-d7c614a80669@tele.no>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2016 14:40:12 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spud/3ANg9wlvMsNTLgydaMmgBghf-M0>
Subject: [Spud] No. Operators don't need SPUD for mobile network management
X-BeenThere: spud@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Session Protocol Underneath Datagrams <spud.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/spud>, <mailto:spud-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/spud/>
List-Post: <mailto:spud@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:spud-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spud>, <mailto:spud-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2016 12:42:24 -0000

Hi,

the claims that encryption has taken away something that was used for 
mobile network traffic management and that PLUS is needed to to save 
mobile network operations keeps surfacing, including at the BoF today. 
This view should not be interpreted as representing the view of all 
mobile operators

The rule is that all "Internet traffic" is assigned the default bearer 
and there's no differentiated handling of the traffic within this 
bearer. It has been hinted that there's exceptions "somewhere" but as 
long this claim is never substantiated, and there's no problem related 
to this in today in mobile networks, we should conclude that PLUS is not 
solving an existing problem related to mobile network management.

Feel free to disagree but then please provide details.

That said, PLUS may be an enabler for mobile network management 
practices, for example a 1-bit latency/throughput prioritization indicator.

Best regards
Frode Kileng