From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-it0-x236.google.com (mail-it0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EEDAF3B25D for ; Thu, 28 Jul 2016 06:28:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-it0-x236.google.com with SMTP id f6so164302011ith.1 for ; Thu, 28 Jul 2016 03:28:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=KLmHNnSiLq+hI0Vbcrmt6bSLDsWd/fsEa5HeHEEQgw8=; b=N2siO3f0kAUpwnwaNXgMr5/YgvZ8jchRHgBMaSIHT9VWAW6JC1qcR1g13FqiaFGw6r Tud9d1VxXghkjf1vtclQ/XYR6WvB5wiwZDIst+gW+NfeGRQgpCZco8Z6ggpJiSEG7u92 uNWjNRwpBf/q3oLYq9Hhu7hchNBHhQgwvUzGOqyKtq4HsjP2ZU6VnAobJZ//eEI4YiRT VByEMSaDWMlymeBzcBiOEa/bvyrnnK54EWqntNYp7iIh12l22iRxf+FQerDbbDrqB/Ou urz2WlABz++woaZ9D1cfALfSf6AjwnN9EqDNVkD+NQHG5dkah12FFAFoS9LbvVxQwe3W LkiQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=KLmHNnSiLq+hI0Vbcrmt6bSLDsWd/fsEa5HeHEEQgw8=; b=E3KVy236LPjj9gfNvUfu1fEPcFjVCWZuMD/nsyTQ0nSa1BEW5hVTq3N/fNizRw9vUU Kl1cYNfxI8PzmdXIB/IxP6Towmms0pf1yE1xLh8T8z9k9awqYzD7aceT3qbotnQiQ2lF zYu9s6o8cgFgZojxm8Bn9ZqVks7V5DqWElh8VY8JGFMbcnGQstebhcemoLrAdkz3Ue4h tgX6T8Jjm1CtuHv2C/OjbgMoJE6ed7m9nHwrZ7w4nbD6TlT4gOOHtBoqYbOAcxvbBlyg xTEP/m1qzGnJOHqyG3XQQ2pUsA62SSXQFPCSEhSqR2yNkerN4ehas6bwhoa3D/Is+hH+ PJQQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AEkooutB1/25Irtbut9jiIcsF6F6hlITRfYxIwq57/NCE/BYkthdf1BuAutivxrHGkELaWznivQIra+A7arZZA== X-Received: by 10.36.5.200 with SMTP id 191mr30159868itl.50.1469701702260; Thu, 28 Jul 2016 03:28:22 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.79.14.17 with HTTP; Thu, 28 Jul 2016 03:28:21 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <1469568716.289512443@apps.rackspace.com> From: Dave Taht Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2016 12:28:21 +0200 Message-ID: To: Mikael Abrahamsson Cc: David Reed , "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] not exactly the most positive outcome X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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: Thu, 28 Jul 2016 10:28:23 -0000 On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 7:38 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrot= e: > On Tue, 26 Jul 2016, dpreed@reed.com wrote: > >> People just take for granted that having their communications controlled >> "end-to-end" by some third party (e.g. The Phone Company) is optimal for >> them. After all, AT&T Bell Labs created the Internet and the WWW. > > > "people" (the general term) just want their Internet access to work. They > don't want to learn how to set it up themselves, they don't want to muck > around in boxes, and they want it to be cheap, fast and rock solid, all t= he > time. They want to set it up once and work great and don't want to have t= o > think about it again. > > They also call the ISP and complain that the ISP service is bad when they > stuck the ISP wifi enabled residential gateway in the back of some lower > corner cabinet behind all the stuff, and hoped they never would have to s= ee > or interact with it again. > > With speed increasing, 5GHz, potentially 60GHz etc, in order to deliver a > decent service to their customers, ISPs have to get involved in their > customers' residential wifi networks to retain and hopefully increase > customer satisfaction. I note that this is generally a job that has also fallen to 3rd party consultants and installers, as well as the more geeky family members. (thankfully, my younger brother took over running my mom's network). I am all in favor of better, voluntary tools, for people to have, mortally opposed to an isp having data about my in-home connection that I have not agreed to share and/or don't have myself. > So with that out of the way, how do we still make this as open and flexib= le > as possible? Lots of startups and established vendors are pitching these > solutions to the ISPs, most of them with their own proprietary extensions > and non-interworking protocols. What's the open and flexible alternative? One - make it mandatory that an ISP is not allowed to lock in their stuff inside the home demarc, but to allow competition here. Germany just did that. http://lwn.net/Articles/695498/ two - make the laws for data privacy and penalties for violating it strict enough to make a company or government to clearly hand off to the owner of the equipment. technologically, I'd like for sufficient standards to emerge so that a competetive market in "cpe" can continue to exist, innovate, and so forth. > > -- > Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se > > _______________________________________________ > Cerowrt-devel mailing list > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht Let's go make home routers and wifi faster! With better software! http://blog.cerowrt.org