Re: [tcmtf] Community Neworks: any idea about them?

<l.wood@surrey.ac.uk> Thu, 10 October 2013 21:48 UTC

Return-Path: <l.wood@surrey.ac.uk>
X-Original-To: tcmtf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcmtf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 180E821E80B9; Thu, 10 Oct 2013 14:48:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.831
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.831 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.233, BAYES_00=-2.599, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BmxmD0HkUqbH; Thu, 10 Oct 2013 14:48:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail1.bemta5.messagelabs.com (mail1.bemta5.messagelabs.com [195.245.231.143]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2807521F8E51; Thu, 10 Oct 2013 14:48:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [85.158.136.51:16491] by server-7.bemta-5.messagelabs.com id CA/85-24315-6A027525; Thu, 10 Oct 2013 21:48:22 +0000
X-Env-Sender: l.wood@surrey.ac.uk
X-Msg-Ref: server-3.tower-49.messagelabs.com!1381441702!27182889!1
X-Originating-IP: [131.227.200.35]
X-StarScan-Received:
X-StarScan-Version: 6.9.12; banners=-,-,-
X-VirusChecked: Checked
Received: (qmail 29472 invoked from network); 10 Oct 2013 21:48:22 -0000
Received: from exht021p.surrey.ac.uk (HELO EXHT021P.surrey.ac.uk) (131.227.200.35) by server-3.tower-49.messagelabs.com with AES128-SHA encrypted SMTP; 10 Oct 2013 21:48:22 -0000
Received: from EXMB01CMS.surrey.ac.uk ([169.254.1.148]) by EXHT021P.surrey.ac.uk ([131.227.200.35]) with mapi; Thu, 10 Oct 2013 22:48:21 +0100
From: <l.wood@surrey.ac.uk>
To: <jsaldana@unizar.es>, <tsv-area@ietf.org>
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 22:46:19 +0100
Thread-Topic: [tcmtf] Community Neworks: any idea about them?
Thread-Index: AQGsCYleI6d2ClbR0uwHsWWEfAsQMQE+g/hmAYGvmKkAwoWkeJoXBfzQgADVdn8=
Message-ID: <290E20B455C66743BE178C5C84F12408374274D58A@EXMB01CMS.surrey.ac.uk>
References: <003801cec408$32ea9560$98bfc020$@unizar.es> <CAPaG1AmcO8a+FEWd+gYa6+mcEVzHf=iUC_Ran1OmHUvTY+=pVw@mail.gmail.com> <000101cec41b$b116ddf0$134499d0$@unizar.es> <CAPaG1Aku8BALtJO9rdu3xV0mJ9L+1Lt_gJ1E7n+3YA-rugiOaw@mail.gmail.com>, <001301cec598$f094d670$d1be8350$@unizar.es>
In-Reply-To: <001301cec598$f094d670$d1be8350$@unizar.es>
Accept-Language: en-US, en-GB
Content-Language: en-GB
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US, en-GB
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 00:12:50 -0700
Cc: tcmtf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [tcmtf] Community Neworks: any idea about them?
X-BeenThere: tcmtf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Tunneling Compressed Multiplexed Traffic Flows \(TCMTF\) discussion list" <tcmtf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tcmtf>, <mailto:tcmtf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tcmtf>
List-Post: <mailto:tcmtf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcmtf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcmtf>, <mailto:tcmtf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 21:48:35 -0000

Webcam/chat is realtime.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niue
The island of Niue  has a similar free internet model, backhauled via a satellite link.

Lloyd Wood
http://sat-net.com/L.Wood/


________________________________________
From: tsv-area-bounces@ietf.org [tsv-area-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jose Saldana [jsaldana@unizar.es]
Sent: 10 October 2013 10:13
To: tsv-area@ietf.org
Cc: tcmtf@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [tcmtf] Community Neworks: any idea about them?

Regarding Community Networks, I have found some information about their
deployment in rural areas. The Council of a village shares an Internet
connection with all the neighbors, and they get Internet for free. For
example, see this small village (1400 people) called Alcalalí, in Alicante,
Spain. http://www.alcalali.es/ver/137/informacion-general.html.

The question is that, when they talk about the services, they say "Consulta
de páginas web, descarga de correos, Facebook, Youtube, Yahoo, Hotmail,
webcam, chats, etc." (web pages, e-mail, Facebook, Youtube, Yahoo, Hotmail,
webcam, chats, etc.). Not a single real-time service is cited.

This can be a very interesting use case for TCM-TF: a "bottleneck" (the
Internet connection) shared by a number of people. If traffic gets
optimized, perhaps they could also offer real-time services like VoIP.

What do you think? This is working in Spain, but it can also be useful for
developing countries or zones where network operators have not deployed an
infrastructure yet.


Thanks!

Jose

> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: arjuna.sathiaseelan@gmail.com [mailto:arjuna.sathiaseelan@gmail.com]
> En nombre de Arjuna Sathiaseelan
> Enviado el: martes, 08 de octubre de 2013 23:43
> Para: jsaldana@unizar.es
> CC: tcmtf@ietf.org; tsv-area@ietf.org
> Asunto: Re: [tcmtf] Community Neworks: any idea about them?
>
> Hello Jose,
> Any method that utilises the low bandwidth infrastructure more efficiently
is
> definitely useful.
>
> Just a digression: have you considered the use of UDP-lite for TCM-TF?
>
> Regards
> Arjuna
>
> On 8 October 2013 12:44, Jose Saldana <jsaldana@unizar.es>; wrote:
> > Hi, Arjuna,
> >
> > The idea of multipath TCP sounds interesting. It consists of "inverse
> > multiplexing" with TCP. However, TCM-TF does "multiplexing" with UDP.
> >
> > What I was thinking is: can these scenarios also fit with TCM-TF? The
> > idea is to compress small-packet flows (VoIP, online games) in order
> > to save bandwidth, when a number of flows share a common path. We
> have
> > discarded the multiplexing of TCP, because the additional delay may
> > modify the dynamics of TCP.
> >
> > TCM-TF combines header compression, multiplexing and tunneling, in
> > order to aggregate a number of flows, when a low-bandwidth link is in
> > the path. Thus, bandwidth can be saved and pps can be reduced, at the
> > cost of processing power.
> >
> > Do you think this case can be found in these kind of networks? In the
> > discussion of TCM-TF in Berlin this summer, some people from Africa
> > were interested, since they think that low-bandwidth links have to be
> > better used.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Jose
> >
> >> -----Mensaje original-----
> >> De: tcmtf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:tcmtf-bounces@ietf.org] En nombre
> >> de Arjuna Sathiaseelan Enviado el: martes, 08 de octubre de 2013
> >> 11:42
> >> Para: jsaldana@unizar.es
> >> CC: tcmtf@ietf.org; tsv-area@ietf.org
> >> Asunto: Re: [tcmtf] Community Neworks: any idea about them?
> >>
> >> Dear Jose,
> >>   I would like to take this opportunity to present some of the work
> >> we are doing here at Cambridge -
> >>
> >> We are trying to solve the universal service problem in urban areas
> >> (where people cannot afford to access the Internet) using existing
> >> home broadband networks - home owners who have Internet
> connections
> >> share their Internet connection for free with those who dont have.
> >>
> >> We are currently doing deployments in a deprived area in Nottingham (
> >> see www.publicaccesswifi.org )
> >>
> >> More on the LCDNet initiative is here:
> >> http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~as2330/lcd/index.html
> >>
> >> There are interesting possibilities to do multi-path TCP between
> > aggregating
> >> multiple access points and we are exploring that option too.
> >>
> >> The TIER group in berkeley have done quite a lot of nice work with
> > wireless
> >> for developing countries:
> >> tier.cs.berkeley.edu/
> >>
> >> Happy to discuss more :)
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> Arjuna
> >>
> >> On 8 October 2013 10:24, Jose Saldana <jsaldana@unizar.es>; wrote:
> >> > Hi all.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I have recently "discovered" the concept of Community Networks.
> >> > They are "large scale, self-organized and decentralized networks,
> >> > built and operated by citizens for citizens." They are "also
> >> > self-owned and self-managed by community members, self-growing in
> >> > links, capacity and
> >> services provided."
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > A paper explaining them can be found here:
> >> > http://www.sigcomm.org/ccr/papers/2013/July/2500098.2500108
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Some examples:
> >> >
> >> > http://funkfeuer.at/
> >> >
> >> > https://wlan-si.net/
> >> >
> >> > http://www.bogota-mesh.org/en
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I would like to know your opinion about this:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > do you think this is a good idea?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Can they be a good place for developing experiments?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I think this can be a good solution for developing countries.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > In addition, regarding TCM-TF, can they be a new scenario where
> >> > traffic optimization could be interesting? I mean, they do not have
> >> > too much bandwidth, and they connect to the Internet through a
> >> > single link in many cases (a bottleneck). One of the services
> >> > considered is
> > VoIP.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Thanks a lot!
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Jose
> >> >
> >> >
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> tcmtf mailing list
> >> tcmtf@ietf.org
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcmtf
> >