From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from bosmailout06.eigbox.net (bosmailout06.eigbox.net [66.96.187.6]) (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 1D6583CB37 for ; Wed, 11 Oct 2023 14:35:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from bosmailscan03.eigbox.net ([10.20.15.3]) by bosmailout06.eigbox.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1qqe3f-0007zP-F2 for nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net; Wed, 11 Oct 2023 14:35:47 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=alum.mit.edu; s=dkim; h=Sender:Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Date: Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Cc:To:From:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=vHl3DCaqoFVVg3ghzxQ6Co5C0o6L4StfNf0z/9pkeJ8=; b=v51rIdVHBIm23jfldA3jY/RyRO 7q7+Y1ahtJA0dd2ryhPM2pCfCvm9a5KLhIlL9Rh7Lukmg8IjIZnKHtQYXNysYzY3yVcWvO4PppL5g aXG32D7zjEybZQdVKhdjMaCjIULyz+KHjsm9MSbb1Rrlh1JLYQhx7A46Uo5JwsNvLN9KszvTRuT0C XmQTDhAQQwgWWK3VLdazUA+FlrqldfP5QbCqbyv6rXfslLSleamVmye6EDKAnf5rxi2s+6sIuZAG5 R9sGNjQs54UtiASZxI6MFWv/i5YQ6vbc1cz3fPX/wAxRYwqwU2Ij1cnU6yI3lbBFE6mXjgA6kZmno f1Ar1EvQ==; Received: from [10.115.3.32] (helo=bosimpout12) by bosmailscan03.eigbox.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1qqe3f-0004WR-6n for nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net; Wed, 11 Oct 2023 14:35:47 -0400 Received: from bosauthsmtp02.yourhostingaccount.com ([10.20.18.2]) by bosimpout12 with id wibk2A00302gpmq01ibnxC; Wed, 11 Oct 2023 14:35:47 -0400 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.3 cv=d4VuNSrE c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=9MP9vxlQrmnoeofDS6o88g==:117 a=tKttg/DTfI8zZz0UFxdR5w==:17 a=bhdUkHdE2iEA:10 a=r77TgQKjGQsHNAKrUKIA:9 a=kurRqvosAAAA:8 a=doUQZJtgAAAA:8 a=TGOQu4c8AAAA:8 a=Y-WR-e6PvxBzSWVXg-4A:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=SSmOFEACAAAA:8 a=_fLt8Rieik7EO0s8-HgA:9 a=XH5BQuYXmQT3pAvu:21 a=gKO2Hq4RSVkA:10 a=UiCQ7L4-1S4A:10 a=hTZeC7Yk6K0A:10 a=frz4AuCg-hUA:10 a=kbxRQ_lfPIoQnHsAj2-A:22 a=d0-0EwFVFT64L02gzcZV:22 a=o0C07otDTeZuy3B71tGT:22 Received: from c-73-158-253-41.hsd1.ca.comcast.net ([73.158.253.41]:58118 helo=SRA6) by bosauthsmtp02.eigbox.net with esmtpa (Exim) id 1qqe3b-0003Wt-Fp; Wed, 11 Oct 2023 14:35:43 -0400 Reply-To: From: "Dick Roy" To: =?UTF-8?Q?'Network_Neutrality_is_back!_Let?= =?UTF-8?Q?=C2=B4s_make_the_technical_aspects_he?= =?UTF-8?Q?ard_this_time!'?= Cc: "'rjmcmahon'" , "'Nick Feamster'" References: <2f0395e99add7014924d288f4569b87b@rjmcmahon.com> In-Reply-To: <2f0395e99add7014924d288f4569b87b@rjmcmahon.com> Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2023 11:35:39 -0700 Organization: SRA Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0410_01D9FC37.12B2D150" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 Thread-Index: Adn8b0oqwPLCLJpFQoeXd2DPHg1ZVwAAKh8w X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE X-EN-UserInfo: f809475445fb8041985048e338e1a001:931c98230c6409dcc37fa7e93b490c27 X-EN-AuthUser: dickroy@intellicommunications.com Sender: "Dick Roy" X-EN-OrigIP: 73.158.253.41 X-EN-OrigHost: c-73-158-253-41.hsd1.ca.comcast.net Subject: Re: [NNagain] Internet Education for Non-technorati? 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: Wed, 11 Oct 2023 18:35:48 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0410_01D9FC37.12B2D150 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20 =20 -----Original Message----- From: Nnagain [mailto:nnagain-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net] On Behalf = Of rjmcmahon via Nnagain Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2023 11:18 AM To: Network Neutrality is back! Let=C2=B4s make the technical aspects = heard this time! Cc: rjmcmahon; Nick Feamster Subject: Re: [NNagain] Internet Education for Non-technorati? =20 I've added many metrics around latency and one way delays (OWD) in iperf = 2. There is no single type of latency, nor are the measurements scalars. = (Few will understand violin plots or histograms on labels) =20 On top of that, a paced flow will have a different e2e latency histogram = than an as fast as possible (AFAP) flow. They also drive different WiFi=20 behaviors. Hence, it's not just a simple arrival rate and service time=20 anymore, even for queuing analysis. (Though Little's Law is pretty cool=20 and useful for displacement ratings) Throw in BSS managed EDCAs and all=20 bets are off. [RR] Wouldn=E2=80=99t the issue of EDCAs (i.e.different queues for = different priority classes with different tx parameters for each), just = make the analysis (more) =E2=80=9Cmultidimensional=E2=80=9D? Might it = be possible to model such scenarios as N different collocated = bridges/routers), one for each access category? Does any of what I just = said make any sense in this context? :-) :-) =20 RR =20 Bob > I think y'all are conflating two different labels here. The nutrition > label was one effort, now being deploye, the other is cybersecurity, > now being discussed. >=20 > On the nutrition front... > We successfully fought against "packet loss" being included on the > nutrition label, but as ghu is my witness, I have no idea if a formal > method for declaring "typical latency" was ever formally derived. >=20 > = https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-requires-broadband-providers-display-lab= els-help-consumers >=20 > On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 10:39=E2=80=AFAM David Bray, PhD via Nnagain > wrote: >>=20 >> I was at a closed-door event discussing these labels about two weeks=20 >> ago (right before the potential government shutdown/temporarily=20 >> averted for now) - and it was non-attribution, so I can only describe = >> my comments: >>=20 >> (1) the labels risk missing the reality that the Internet and=20 >> cybersecurity are not steady state, which begs the question how will=20 >> they be updated >> (2) the labels say nothing about how - even if the company promises = to=20 >> keep your data private and secure - how good their security practices = >> are internal to the company? Or what if the company is bought in 5=20 >> years? >> (3) they use QR-codes to provide additional info, yet we know = QR-codes=20 >> can be sent to bad links so what if someone replaces a label with a=20 >> bad link such that the label itself becomes an exploit? >>=20 >> I think the biggest risks is these we be rolled out, some exploit = will=20 >> occur that the label didn't consider, consumers will be angry they=20 >> weren't "protected" and now we are even in worse shape because the=20 >> public's trust has gone further down hill, they angry at the=20 >> government, and the private sector feels like the time and energy = they=20 >> spent on the labels was for naught? >>=20 >> There's also the concern about how do startups roll-out such a label=20 >> for their tech in the early iteration phase? How do they afford to do = >> the extra work for the label vs. a big company (does this become a=20 >> regulatory moat?) >>=20 >> And let's say we have these labels. Will only consumers with the = money=20 >> to purchase the more expensive equipment that has more privacy and=20 >> security features buy that one - leaving those who cannot afford=20 >> privacy and security bad alternatives? >>=20 >> On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 1:31=E2=80=AFPM Jack Haverty via Nnagain=20 >> wrote: >>>=20 >>> A few days ago I made some comments about the idea of "educating" = the >>> lawyers, politicians, and other smart, but not necessarily=20 >>> technically >>> adept, decision makers. Today I saw a news story about a recent FCC >>> action, to mandate "nutrition labels" on Internet services offered = by=20 >>> ISPs: >>>=20 >>> = https://cordcuttersnews.com/fcc-says-comcast-spectrum-att-must-start-disp= laying-the-true-cost-and-speed-of-their-internet-service-starting-april-2= 024/ >>>=20 >>> This struck me as anecdotal, but a good example of the need for >>> education. Although it's tempting and natural to look at existing >>> infrastructures as models for regulating a new one, IMHO the = Internet >>> does not work like the Food/Agriculture infrastructure does. >>>=20 >>> For example, the new mandates require ISPs to "label" their products >>> with "nutritional" data including "typical" latency, upload, and >>> download speeds. They have until April 2024 to figure it out. I've >>> never encountered an ISP who could answer such questions - even the=20 >>> ones >>> I was involved in managing. Marketing can of course create an=20 >>> answer, >>> since "typical" is such a vague term. Figuring out how to attach = the >>> physical label to their service product may be a problem. >>>=20 >>> Such labels may not be very helpful to the end user struggling to=20 >>> find >>> an ISP that delivers the service needed for some interactive use=20 >>> (audio >>> or video conferencing, gaming, home automation, etc.) >>>=20 >>> Performance on the Internet depends on where the two endpoints are,=20 >>> the >>> physical path to get from one to the other, as well as the hardware, >>> software, current load, and other aspects of each endpoint, all=20 >>> outside >>> the ISPs' control or vision. Since the two endpoints can be on >>> different ISPs, perhaps requiring one or more additional = internediate >>> ISPs, specifying a "typical" performance from all Points A to all=20 >>> Points >>> B is even more challenging. >>>=20 >>> Switching to the transportation analogy, one might ask your local = bus=20 >>> or >>> rail company what their typical time is to get from one city to >>> another. If the two cities involved happen to be on their rail or=20 >>> bus >>> network, perhaps you can get an answer, but it will still depend on >>> where the two endpoints are. If one or both cities are not on their >>> rail network, the travel time might have to include use of other >>> "networks" - bus, rental car, airplane, ship, etc. How long does = it >>> typically take for you to get from any city on the planet to any=20 >>> other >>> city on the planet? >>>=20 >>> IMHO, rules and regulations for the Internet need to reflect how the >>> Internet actually works. That's why I suggested a focus on = education >>> for the decision makers. >>>=20 >>> Jack Haverty >>>=20 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Nnagain mailing list >>> Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net >>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> Nnagain mailing list >> Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain _______________________________________________ Nnagain mailing list Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain ------=_NextPart_000_0410_01D9FC37.12B2D150 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Nnagain [mailto:nnagain-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net] On Behalf = Of rjmcmahon via Nnagain
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2023 11:18 AM
To: Network Neutrality is back! Let=C2=B4s make the technical aspects = heard this time!
Cc: rjmcmahon; Nick Feamster
Subject: Re: [NNagain] Internet Education for = Non-technorati?

 

I've added many metrics around latency and one way delays (OWD) = in iperf

2. There is no single type of latency, nor are the measurements scalars.

(Few will understand violin plots or histograms on = labels)

 

On top of that, a paced flow will have a different e2e latency histogram

than an as fast as possible (AFAP) flow. They also drive = different WiFi

behaviors. Hence, it's not just a simple arrival rate and = service time

anymore, even for queuing analysis. (Though Little's Law is = pretty cool

and useful for displacement ratings) Throw in BSS managed EDCAs = and all

bets are off.

[RR] Wouldn=E2=80=99t the issue of EDCAs (i.e.different queues for different priority classes = with different tx parameters for each), just make the analysis (more) = =E2=80=9Cmultidimensional=E2=80=9D? =C2=A0Might it be possible to model such scenarios as N different = collocated bridges/routers), one for each access category? =C2=A0Does any of what I = just said make any sense in this context? J J

 

RR

 

Bob

> I think y'all are conflating two different labels here. The nutrition

> label was one effort, now being deploye, the other is cybersecurity,

> now being discussed.

>

> On the nutrition front...

> We successfully fought against "packet loss" = being included on the

> nutrition label, but as ghu is my witness, I have no idea = if a formal

> method for declaring "typical latency" was ever = formally derived.

>

> = https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-requires-broadband-providers-display-lab= els-help-consumers

>

> On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 10:39=E2=80=AFAM David Bray, PhD = via Nnagain

> <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> = wrote:

>>

>> I was at a closed-door event discussing these labels = about two weeks

>> ago (right before the potential government shutdown/temporarily

>> averted for now) - and it was non-attribution, so I can = only describe

>> my comments:

>>

>> (1) the labels risk missing the reality that the = Internet and

>> cybersecurity are not steady state, which begs the = question how will

>> they be updated

>> (2) the labels say nothing about how - even if the = company promises to

>> keep your data private and secure - how good their = security practices

>> are internal to the company? Or what if the company is = bought in 5

>> years?

>> (3) they use QR-codes to provide additional info, yet = we know QR-codes

>> can be sent to bad links so what if someone replaces a = label with a

>> bad link such that the label itself becomes an = exploit?

>>

>> I think the biggest risks is these we be rolled out, = some exploit will

>> occur that the label didn't consider, consumers will be = angry they

>> weren't "protected" and now we are even in = worse shape because the

>> public's trust has gone further down hill, they angry = at the

>> government, and the private sector feels like the time = and energy they

>> spent on the labels was for = naught?

>>

>> There's also the concern about how do startups roll-out = such a label

>> for their tech in the early iteration phase? How do = they afford to do

>> the extra work for the label vs. a big company (does = this become a

>> regulatory moat?)

>>

>> And let's say we have these labels. Will only consumers = with the money

>> to purchase the more expensive equipment that has more = privacy and

>> security features buy that one - leaving those who = cannot afford

>> privacy and security bad = alternatives?

>>

>> On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 1:31=E2=80=AFPM Jack Haverty via = Nnagain

>> <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> = wrote:

>>>

>>> A few days ago I made some comments about the idea = of "educating" the

>>> lawyers, politicians, and other smart, but not = necessarily

>>> technically

>>> adept, decision makers.=C2=A0 Today I saw a news = story about a recent FCC

>>> action, to mandate "nutrition labels" on Internet services offered by

>>> ISPs:

>>>

>>> https://cordcuttersnews.com/fcc-says-comcast-spectrum-att-must-start-disp= laying-the-true-cost-and-speed-of-their-internet-service-starting-april-2= 024/

>>>

>>> This struck me as anecdotal, but a good example of = the need for

>>> education.=C2=A0 Although it's tempting and natural = to look at existing

>>> infrastructures as models for regulating a new one, = IMHO the Internet

>>> does not work like the Food/Agriculture = infrastructure does.

>>>

>>> For example, the new mandates require ISPs to "label" their products

>>> with "nutritional" data including "typical" latency, upload, and

>>> download speeds.=C2=A0=C2=A0 They have until April = 2024 to figure it out. I've

>>> never encountered an ISP who could answer such = questions - even the

>>> ones

>>> I was involved in managing.=C2=A0 Marketing can of = course create an

>>> answer,

>>> since "typical" is such a vague = term.=C2=A0 Figuring out how to attach the

>>> physical label to their service product may be a = problem.

>>>

>>> Such labels may not be very helpful to the end user struggling to

>>> find

>>> an ISP that delivers the service needed for some interactive use

>>> (audio

>>> or video conferencing, gaming, home automation, = etc.)

>>>

>>> Performance on the Internet depends on where the = two endpoints are,

>>> the

>>> physical path to get from one to the other, as well = as the hardware,

>>> software, current load, and other aspects of each endpoint, all

>>> outside

>>> the ISPs' control or vision.=C2=A0=C2=A0 Since the = two endpoints can be on

>>> different ISPs, perhaps requiring one or more = additional internediate

>>> ISPs, specifying a "typical" performance = from all Points A to all

>>> Points

>>> B is even more = challenging.

>>>

>>> Switching to the transportation analogy, one might = ask your local bus

>>> or

>>> rail company what their typical time is to get from = one city to

>>> another.=C2=A0=C2=A0 If the two cities involved = happen to be on their rail or

>>> bus

>>> network, perhaps you can get an answer, but it will = still depend on

>>> where the two endpoints are.=C2=A0 If one or both = cities are not on their

>>> rail network, the travel time might have to include = use of other

>>> "networks" - bus, rental car, airplane, = ship, etc.=C2=A0=C2=A0 How long does it

>>> typically take for you to get from any city on the = planet to any

>>> other

>>> city on the planet?

>>>

>>> IMHO, rules and regulations for the Internet need = to reflect how the

>>> Internet actually works.=C2=A0 That's why I = suggested a focus on education

>>> for the decision = makers.

>>>

>>> Jack Haverty

>>>

>>> = _______________________________________________<= /p>

>>> Nnagain mailing list

>>> = Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net

>>> = https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain

>>

>> = _______________________________________________<= /p>

>> Nnagain mailing list

>> = Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net

>> = https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain

_______________________________________________=

Nnagain mailing list

Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net

https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain<= /font>

------=_NextPart_000_0410_01D9FC37.12B2D150--