From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-oa0-x234.google.com (mail-oa0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c02::234]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 90C0321F5D8 for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 11:12:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oa0-f52.google.com with SMTP id o6so3377368oag.11 for ; Fri, 01 Aug 2014 11:12:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=E3uY/4+pI+tiFVO6FgQtMBvdOT8QwFcl8zCEkqRyTho=; b=UiuH5gwO+CDrzW5U7K0H+rIsMqYwqWNO0PRMt8W/i1QU+mGr/M/WuuyjKUynCBhHXy NPlVyJI5LyPqiZ8JmakKWP9wQfORvhYCxrZWdUp3dCnLJdmqsG92GjwAu2ABmJlWp+DI IDgm1AViQxHCc9iyR59EBLXa18u9SlTuzBi4//PNXDzF7IHe3/NrdgxZ90dvsIoEWVUC ixmbTy9vadNtZ0IwGtZ4pbRO6O65m3vl94DeXOtoC3bd3tFjP8RPOu4ey6K7r9shcVgy l17HLLuG81b1TRc2MfVIvzFwacXS09IxtDGMux1qAE4lt9BUeOGtq/+LRhLXf6cXNYWx oShg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.176.10 with SMTP id ce10mr10771232oec.8.1406916725637; Fri, 01 Aug 2014 11:12:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.202.93.69 with HTTP; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 11:12:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2014 14:12:05 -0400 Message-ID: From: Dave Taht To: Sebastian Moeller , "uknof@lists.uknof.org.uk" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0118313aa9060b04ff9553cc Cc: Wes Felter , "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" Subject: [Cerowrt-devel] How is DSL sold and bandwidth managed in the UK? X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2014 18:12:06 -0000 --089e0118313aa9060b04ff9553cc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable uknof list: There has been a long discussion on the cerowrt-devel list about how/when/ and where to get bufferbloat related fixes into the head ends and CPE, and it's confusing as to who can and what sort of devices controls what, The uk seems to have a vibrant dsl based isp market all getting stuff from BT. How does it work in Britain? I am under the impression that there are a lot of HFSC + SFQ based rate limiters there for various classes of service See below for some open questions on the role of the DSLAM, the BRAS, etc..= . Or see "the ideas on how to simplify and popularize bufferbloat control" thread: https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/cerowrt-devel/2014-July/thread.html On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 2:04 PM, Sebastian Moeller wrote: > Hi MIchael, > > On Aug 1, 2014, at 06:51 , Michael Richardson wrote: > > > > > Sebastian Moeller wrote: > >> No idea? How would you test this (any command line to try). The > good > >> thingg with the ping is that often even the DSLAM responds keeping > >> external sources (i.e. hops further away in the network) of variabilit= y > >> out of the measurement... > > > > With various third-party-internet-access ("TPIA" in Canada), the DSLAM > > is operated by the incumbent (monopoly) telco, and the layer-3 first ho= p > > is connected via PPPoE-VLAN or PPP/L2TP. > > So they =E2=80=9Cown=E2=80=9D the copper lines connecting each cu= stomer to the > DSLAM? And everybody else just rents their DSL service and resells them? = Do > they really connect to the DSLAM or to the BRAS? > > > The incumbent telco has significant > > incentive to make the backhaul network as congested and bufferbloated a= s > > possible, and to mis-crimp cables so that the DSL resyncs at different > speeds > > regularly=E2=80=A6 > > I think in Germany the incumbent has to either rent out the coppe= r > lines to competitors (who can put their own lines cards in DSLAMs backed = by > their own back-bone) or rent =E2=80=9Cbit-stream=E2=80=9D access that is = the incumbent > handles the DSL part on both ends and passes the traffic either in the ne= xt > central office or at specific transit points. I always assumed competitor= s > renting these services would get much better guarantees than end-customer= s, > but it seems in Canada the incumbent has more found ways to evade efficie= nt > regulation. > > > my incumbent telco's commercial LAN extension salesperson > > proudly told me how they never drop packets, even when their links are > > congested!!! > > I really hope this is the opinion of a sales person and not the > network operators who really operate the gear in the =E2=80=9Cfield=E2=80= =9D. On the other > hand having sufficient buffering in the DSLAM to never having to drop a > packet sounds quite manly (and a terrible waste of otherwise fine DRAM > chips) ;) > > > > > The Third Party ISP has a large incentive to deploy equipment that > supports > > whatever "bandwidth measurement" service we might cook up. > > As much as I would like to think otherwise, the only way to get a > BMS in the field is if all national regulators require it by law (well > maybe if ITU would bake it into the next xDSL standard that the DSLAM has > to report current line speeds as per SNMP? back to all down stream device= s > asking for it). But I am not holding my breath=E2=80=A6 > > Best Regards > Sebastian > > > > > -- > > Michael Richardson > > -on the road- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Cerowrt-devel mailing list > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel > --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht NSFW: https://w2.eff.org/Censorship/Internet_censorship_bills/russell_0296_indece= nt.article --089e0118313aa9060b04ff9553cc Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
uknof list:

There has been a long= discussion on the cerowrt-devel list about how/when/ and where to get buff= erbloat related fixes into the head ends and CPE, and it's confusing as= to who can and what sort of devices controls what,=C2=A0

The uk seems to have a vibrant dsl based isp market all gett= ing stuff from BT.

How does it work in Britain? I am under the impression that ther= e are a lot of HFSC + SFQ based rate limiters there for various classes of = service

See below f= or some open questions on the role of the DSLAM, the BRAS, etc...

Or= see "the ideas on how to simplify and popularize bufferbloat control&= quot; thread:


On Fri, Aug 1, 20= 14 at 2:04 PM, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
<= blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-l= eft-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;pa= dding-left:1ex"> Hi MIchael,

On Aug 1, 2014, at 06:51 , Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ca> wrote:

>
> Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.= de> wrote:
>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0No idea? How would you test this (any command = line to try). The good
>> thingg with the ping is that often even the DSLAM responds keeping=
>> external sources (i.e. hops further away in the network) of variab= ility
>> out of the measurement...
>
> With various third-party-internet-access ("TPIA" in Canada),= =C2=A0the DSLAM
> is operated by the incumbent (monopoly) telco, and the layer-3 first h= op
> is connected via PPPoE-VLAN or PPP/L2TP.

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 So they =E2=80=9Cown=E2=80=9D the copper = lines connecting each customer to the DSLAM? And everybody else just rents = their DSL service and resells them? Do they really connect to the DSLAM or = to the BRAS?

> The incumbent telco has significant
> incentive to make the backhaul network as congested and bufferbloated = as
> possible, and to mis-crimp cables so that the DSL resyncs at different= speeds
> regularly=E2=80=A6

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 I think in Germany the incumbent has to either = rent out the copper lines to competitors (who can put their own lines cards= in DSLAMs backed by their own back-bone) or rent =E2=80=9Cbit-stream=E2=80= =9D access that is the incumbent handles the DSL part on both ends and pass= es the traffic either in the next central office or at specific transit poi= nts. I always assumed competitors renting these services would get much bet= ter guarantees than end-customers, but it seems in Canada the incumbent has= more found ways to evade efficient regulation.

> my incumbent telco's commercial LAN extension salesperson
> proudly told me how they never drop packets, even when their links are=
> congested!!!

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 I really hope this is the opinion of a sa= les person and not the network operators who really operate the gear in the= =E2=80=9Cfield=E2=80=9D. On the other hand having sufficient buffering in = the DSLAM to never having to drop a packet sounds quite manly (and a terrib= le waste of otherwise fine DRAM chips) ;)

>
> The Third Party ISP has a large incentive to deploy equipment that sup= ports
> whatever "bandwidth measurement" service we might cook up.
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 As much as I would like to think otherwis= e, the only way to get a BMS in the field is if all national regulators req= uire it by law (well maybe if ITU would bake it into the next xDSL standard= that the DSLAM has to report current line speeds as per SNMP? back to all = down stream devices asking for it). But I am not holding my breath=E2=80=A6=

Best Regards
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Sebast= ian

>
> --
> Michael Richardson
> -on the road-
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

___________________________________= ____________
Cerowrt-devel mailing list
Cerowrt-devel@lists.= bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel



--
= Dave T=C3=A4ht

NSFW: https:= //w2.eff.org/Censorship/Internet_censorship_bills/russell_0296_indecent.art= icle
--089e0118313aa9060b04ff9553cc--