NNSquad - Network Neutrality Squad
[ NNSquad ] Re: Editorial Comment on "Entry level pricing"
Neil, I agree with much that you're saying. But part of what makes this so complex is that we tend to often conflate different aspects of the "network neutrality" debate into one rather large and dense lump. For example, it's possible to separate -- to a significant extent -- the technical details from statements of societal policy. E.g., "ISPs should be free to conduct business however they see fit without any regulation of any kind." Or, "Reasonable regulation of ISPs is deemed necessary and appropriate by society in keeping with society's established interest in promoting the general welfare of its citizens." We also need definitions. I believe we'd pretty much all agree that "up to this speed" advertisements for Internet access services are largely useless without additional data that usually is not available to potential or current subscribers. So how to define the "Internet access experience" in a flexible but meaningful manner? Not easy. I'm reminded of Microsoft's "Vista Experience" rating that attempts to suggest how well any given hardware configuration will run Vista. I've found that rating to be essentially useless. Coming up with a consumer experience rating for Internet access would be even harder (though, as we've heard previously on this list, there have been proposals for more rigorous methodologies for such ratings). Then you're faced with how to get ISPs to accept such rating regimes absent regulatory pressure, given that it isn't necessarily in an ISPs own self-interest to reveal such details to consumers. And you need measurements. Old saying: If you can't measure it, it isn't science. Basically, in the Internet access world, there are only two main ways to get network measurements. One is to depend on ISPs to do so fairly and effectively, and for them to make the resulting data widely available. But again, what's in it for them in an unregulated, at best largely oligarchical environment? Much of the measurement data we'd really like to see to better understand what's going on is often considered to be proprietary by ISPs. Or computer users and the Internet sites that they frequent can take, analyze, and share their own measurements. This concept was a key aspect of the network measurement meeting at Google last year, which was the genesis for GCTIP ( http://www.gctip.org ). I personally feel that a bottom-up, consumer-led approach to this problem has the best chance of success, but it's still not easy. Not only are there a variety of technical, logistical, and privacy issues involved, it can also be quite nontrivial to analyze the resulting data without knowledge of ISP internal topologies. This can lead, for example, to consumers assuming that they are being purposely blocked by an ISP, when in reality an ephemeral routing or other temporary and purely technical problem is at fault. However, I do believe that these issues could be overcome with sufficient dedication and effort, and I still very much support the consumer-based approach. In significant ways, getting Internet access service is like buying drinks at a bar. For any given drink, how much genuine booze is mixed with how much water or other diluting agents? How much do these ratios vary from day to day and with time of day? Does the bartender tend to dilute the drinks more when the bar is crowded, rather than buy enough extra liquor to keep the ratio up to standard even during Happy Hour? And how do you judge the ratio anyway? Taste? Buzz level? It's easy enough to weigh a bag of M&Ms or count the number of tasty chocolate-coated morsels that were provided. But most any time that we're dealing with products or services of a less physical nature, especially when their "contents" can be easily altered or finessed, it's all a much tougher proposition. --Lauren-- NNSquad Moderator - - - On 10/05 23:32, Neil Davies wrote: > Lauren > > I could not let your editorial commentary (below), just pass: > > But the issues of sharing and oversubscription are relevant > across all forms of Internet access, not just wireless. ISPs > make essentially arbitrary decisions about how many customers > will share most elements of the physical plant. Yes, DSL is a > dedicated pair back to the CO or terminal, but after that it's > just as subject to oversubscription performance problems -- from > the subscribers' standpoint, as anything else. And of course, as > lowly subscribers, we usually have no clue how bad that > oversubscription or other undercapacity problems will be at any > given time. > > While nothing you've said is false, it doesn't do justice to how > fundamental these issues of 'sharing' and 'the decisions' really are. > There is a real truth that is hinted here. One that, I believe, goes to > the very heart of how 'neutrality' can be expressed, and in principle > measured. Let me see if I can explain. > > It is all about experience (or emergent properties if you want to be > more formal) - specifically the delay and loss characteristics that > a subscribers traffic 'experiences'. That experience is, in turn, the > composite effect of a the 'sharing' and 'decisions' being made at the > network elements. As a subscriber I don't care about all that detail > I only care about the composite effect - the 'total' delay and loss > my traffic experiences. > > This is not a concern about the fate of any individual data packets - > it is about the general trends, the distribution, of those delay and > loss > characteristics over several packets. > > What do I want? I want to know that my application will get (with a > reasonably > high probability) sufficient of its data packets through the network so > that > the application delivers a service to me that is fit-for-purpose. I want > to > have a bound on the extremes of delay and loss delivered to my traffic > which > is published and, preferably - at least for some of my applications - > has > associated with it a contractual commitment to be delivered. I may even > be > prepared to pay more for such a service - because I can now rely on it. > > This is all measurable and quantitative. Aspects of neutrality can then > be > expressed as 'deliver me the same loss and delay characteristics as X' - > ISPs > can then express their services in those terms - and what their > restrictions are > for getting that those services, be they by time of day or quantity over > a time period. > > Yes, all of this is as a result of the 'sharing' and the decisions - how > the equipment > is configured, how much over-subscription etc. As subscribers we don't > want to know how > bad the ISPs problems are - we need to know is what we can rely on. > > Neil > > > >