From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EB5DF3CB38 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 2024 04:16:41 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.de; s=s31663417; t=1709975788; x=1710580588; i=moeller0@gmx.de; bh=1ZXLrOlyyo8bvwPItSGlVFbMDjqLIfZOG698CLFJhwc=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References: To; b=e8DxxjzNfjJSjBojNjGINp382RvYAWsqT4KRVYXu5F3dP3BiIxSFtJZt3sR++gJ4 e5WQC2qsJff+6uFQ5Mnn4G7YOe/xSfmJTpyE2diXbnos4/7HbzzTzs6ihHzOWMMXz p/O/9R+yilrjK41A5gf30ojjm6BmLFMdZ5/PHRASyZxvx9/VA0xqqSPEqA1WoyW+J QZJeh8xYwxSj4od7xRzH0xiTxCHcm/DHBfrHiiKv1rhr1n55VUI/INqjUFe7XX6rx voeE+JP2i1iGoREOi5twqZcvV3HiADmHvs+lz2ZRRXMoL+UQ7QiBebPpgGowgOFM3 rVWAQcjx/sIKuzgw+Q== X-UI-Sender-Class: 724b4f7f-cbec-4199-ad4e-598c01a50d3a Received: from smtpclient.apple ([95.116.156.200]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx104 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1Md6R1-1rAeOV1afD-00aHWN; Sat, 09 Mar 2024 10:16:28 +0100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3774.500.171.1.1\)) From: Sebastian Moeller In-Reply-To: Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2024 10:16:17 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: To: =?utf-8?Q?Network_Neutrality_is_back!_Let=C2=B4s_make_the_technical_as?= =?utf-8?Q?pects_heard_this_time!?= X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3774.500.171.1.1) X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:nJ95EEZkdfdONM5NVsRF8JQK9wk+MaEh4meQp6Lj15IvAP4HwNS qVT4cj+rBMowG0Qacpl8jm8Z2yXWkIa0UkCUtP79QifE/WlegjE6b0mEeGbZWXILKg/Q9kS BPn2I/awSEK49f+y0+igxqWxKzLoxTlkhosXzbMrE5DtFj0ZYZl6Jius4ZR5Vhi83gn0CFp C8O7vFB78vDNDI5OJLQEA== X-Spam-Flag: NO UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:omQS2zFBW20=;S5UDauc45Cwnb4+YT4+5iJ6r31X Z83VaEcT+EiA+hJctW5kz4JNvA/jb8hyOQqbtL48TFO481gXgD6+a3bL0zCFHsOu5U1QvAQ2j zxyXt6sreVIApJR9VOZO6wDJjuSEdx8fpwuXZoQ8Z205wsLaQx0aX9EnNHxC+jP2kuWMvQUWi +FPDI84BvyvE8YLiAXIkhpFi2n7OVVvJvi0c589iyMlSsjixt7Jex7C4eC4orw31w4T9075sP FVyLwgFnti9WGnro01xsCAyDZjC9JBO33ZFl+drsKbUEs6PY0J8/qv5RRZCm0iIt3GWHZM2+s rGWN6TWnUNFBQxrYvUBEog7+ByQA+SecO0CFq/bo+PUUzxXLZNkGm3Ef273KDP6mZ51oWZRmJ O+GFO56zcK4lWDflXCrlz1gNYK2MY0OCDNGz/geo2q6LSN+Xt23r8q5KDkA4eLUYVJ401SZoK N3UlljnYYfJvURHxV4LLJU9iwaYpRBxROWYXRvcT3sn7Di+l19A/I5kO903/uTmmHriSqT9sx RLkQ/vk5yhoPsP4j0TWeef2qclFOc6RigNaLEYjiWJPiiOTxbgLadSVRPXsel79p+aKVQPRRn V5npsuFRJ0QN3a+r485CQFyr/qkKPnESXswa+TlLH0neLf6npJHA9NLIXsFl0ewIBq1NK8Hqp BVMOVfgej7CTh41GkI33rF1JZbXTqnXCj9gZtxGH+np1ksK/pbBwKCOnZ/b5ciFxKGfxouiOw CwQG6w8Cp2UAzUKGOgfdGmGnjOFgnkb3/m+kEwhKfzMDr6sgmbWt205WG1cCMybEaTHMI1/LX upJxdN8KPZPivsIooeAwCf3aYwQoUOpli92nMBbWr6etg= Subject: Re: [NNagain] Verizon, T-Mobile, Nokia get noisy on network slicing and net neutrality (LightReading) X-BeenThere: nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: =?utf-8?q?Network_Neutrality_is_back!_Let=C2=B4s_make_the_technical_aspects_heard_this_time!?= List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 09 Mar 2024 09:16:42 -0000 Hi Jason. > On 9. Mar 2024, at 00:30, Livingood, Jason via Nnagain = wrote: >=20 > I find it difficult to imagine a lot of consumer use cases for this = (and find it another rather complex 3GPP spec). I can see some = enterprise, industrial, and event (e.g. sports venue) use cases - but = those seem like simple give X devices priority over Y devices sorts of = scenarios.=20 [SM] Looking at the wikipedia article on slicing I see: "Network slicing emerges as an essential technique in 5G networks to = accommodate such different and possibly contrasting quality of service = (QoS) requirements exploiting a single physical network = infrastructure.[1][13] [...] Impact and applications In commercial terms, network slicing allows a mobile operator to create = specific virtual networks that cater to particular clients and use = cases. Certain applications - such as mobile broadband, = machine-to-machine communications (e.g. in manufacturing or logistics), = or smart cars - will benefit from leveraging different aspects of 5G = technology. One might require higher speeds, another low latency, and = yet another access to edge computingresources. By creating separate = slices that prioritise specific resources a 5G operator can offer = tailored solutions to particular industries.[14][15]:=E2=80=8A3=E2=80=8A = Some sources insist this will revolutionise industries like marketing, = augmented reality, or mobile gaming,[16][17] while others are more = cautious, pointing to unevenness in network coverage and poor reach of = advantages beyond increased speed.[18][19]" As expected this technique is designed to allow exactly what NN was = designed to prohibit (treating packets differentially in the internet = based on economic considerations*)... this is IMHO why instead of = calling a spade a spade mobile carriers avoid describing this in a = useful way, as it is exactly about prioritisation... IMHO that will back = fire, and a better avenue would be to be open about what it enables and = propose a method to restrict the potential issues. E.g. (I am making = this up on the fly, so it will likely not hold up to any degree of = scrutiny) by self limiting to never commit more than X% of a cell's = capacity to slicing, IFF the cell is used for normal end user service at = all. So admit that there is some trade-off here, limit the fall-out, and = then describe why we as a society should embrace that trade-off. I am a = bit sceptical about the whole car 2 car communication thing (that is = cars talk to cars, not people n cars talk to people on cars ;) ), but if = a Carrier believes there is value in that for e.g. accident avoidance, = then tell how this requires the stricter network guarantees that (only?) = slicing can deliver. Personally I still think this is not an attractive proposition, but I am = not the audience for that anyway; the relevant regulatory agency and the = legislative is. Regards Sebastian *) This is a (too) short condensation of the rationale of the EU for = stepping into the NN debate. > From: Nnagain on behalf of the = keyboard of geoff goodfellow via Nnagain > Sent: Friday, March 8, 2024 5:08:28 PM > To: Network Neutrality is back! Let=C2=B4s make the technical aspects = heard this time! > Cc: the keyboard of geoff goodfellow > Subject: [NNagain] Verizon, T-Mobile, Nokia get noisy on network = slicing and net neutrality (LightReading) 'Placing unnecessary = restrictions on this technology could stifle it in its infancy,' Verizon = wrote of network slicing, in a widening debate involving the FCC's net = neutrality proceeding and new wireless technologies... > [...] > = https://www.lightreading.com/regulatory-politics/verizon-t-mobile-nokia-ge= t-noisy-on-network-slicing-and-net-neutrality > via > https://twitter.com/mikeddano/status/1766207009106669682 >=20 > --=20 > Geoff.Goodfellow@iconia.com > living as The Truth is True >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Nnagain mailing list > Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain