From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from atl4mhob19.registeredsite.com (atl4mhob19.registeredsite.com [209.17.115.112]) (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 094AA3B29D for ; Tue, 14 Nov 2023 14:27:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from mymail.myregisteredsite.com (jax4wmnode3b.mymail.myregisteredsite.com [209.237.134.215]) by atl4mhob19.registeredsite.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with SMTP id 3AEJRVie022031 for ; Tue, 14 Nov 2023 14:27:31 -0500 Received: (qmail 27189 invoked by uid 80); 14 Nov 2023 19:27:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.1.100?) (jack@3kitty.org@76.137.180.175) by 209.237.134.154 with ESMTPA; 14 Nov 2023 19:27:31 -0000 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------osKAPOiKooTKyr6z0VO36I3E" Message-ID: Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2023 11:27:28 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird To: Sebastian Moeller , =?UTF-8?Q?Network_Neutrality_is_back!_Let=C2=B4s_make_the_technical_aspects?= =?UTF-8?Q?_heard_this_time!?= References: <96DDD887-4AC2-4F11-9B49-5ED6FC3F5FA2@gmx.de> Content-Language: en-US From: Jack Haverty Autocrypt: addr=jack@3kitty.org; keydata= xsDNBGCm2psBDADGOWO8n9wfkDW9ZUEo8o+SZ5MU9us2il+fS4EFM/RaZFIbQ+P72bExzSd3 WnJdPfqO1O7Q+dRnvVO9+G2/9oT/uRZVaE05+SothzKZBv32HcZoUkdNZOTqSkdo3EwNPjid LLxX+dMBxMpR3pBdvGN8Z7lnZe6fV4QO2xtd58y3B33AVZJp+RuNwucby9dY2meyy2BJVKrx mKhYXAucVyg0ALVIchHt9UknVW4aLvQF+oMfzXVvCWeguW+DvbyazVceWGO7FSgUJ8ED3Ii7 xAR5zZJ1LASoMhG1ixg07P9Uy4ohV6c+c0yV9SY4yqhZ3+zN2cm9h/aXpwjSuiVVAJbK7zzb FjI+h89dbnaVQrLx6GikV0OVYqC6TCeMfCFZQAJLs1icxQi3BLL7O1fbTGatEfTgLa5nqfKq K/D/HlOCUeFxqZI8hXvT5dG4e1m3ilpF2/ytcWKSVg3d699UFntPv3sEbAQwwfXsnuD4Hem6 0Ao0/z41n8x1aeZE80FdkpEAEQEAAc0eSmFjayBIYXZlcnR5IDxqYWNrQDNraXR0eS5vcmc+ wsEJBBMBCAAzFiEEZLvMn5vmvTAlFEILdGzDIkA7jlAFAmCm2pwCGwMFCwkIBwIGFQgJCgsC BRYCAwEAAAoJEHRswyJAO45QuX0L/jOluv8fr/BmuEEQsWWGW6oARIbjDQrI93kXIJXuPnfp tGjkx/f1TMIzI2B9s/tejiYE7IZOhWbX1YvKF0UbkSJi50UyV9XtYRnLdD5TcksKB4luDF8S R+nj5WBm17Bp8qwriCMgA1jGL2wQ7J1KUw4Q/gsMcjhn/39PevswkriU2qqVplfCs9yTTMU5 SvtE2U9F3Y1ZINHn3kUysvxhRFd+Oh3PocWHmVE+hkII+qsra6z4eztDgoB+vqxmOJEdtvex GhT8OKu74DacguZVfu/AV+cwpX701sdjJrMyKjcv8uhFLM/E5gf6kSUAFxBVwe6pNDmAgmbS c0fAFrZjgXxNxxndpu/8OAUDVzKg+l5WJ0nWss9Q14BwA+FcoclO3lwzFu7jOiLvkm7jQkFB o+p8Owe4iAED1KK/aocIa/RiD4sZ3KXUJ92kkemZ1Qe2XpFVdzxaQDG0huNkc5Mie9rdt62O Ae+5cYdPeWmBVn+pFNs5H09kQQbVR5pUxe2Aps7AzQRgptqcAQwAzzougHNMFr/O/L8HnNJW 1YyOuX0PEVNUXQPwkxKuD8bAXsPr4Hv1a+840ByesiJSadhQgVSMruRqoQC5tTkbEWkqlfDW waNAdqCJOXl2T6gtK7RpcHNx7+/du/gCAhHOXqH1Qfs0Zi3YEbR/kQFRP3wD4GiCvHSny8zJ X9plIHqQGoE5DePNAtE2KimbFMsjguqJgq5x0tMf3qEaMNd0IGTStGpcC49iss71slotH091 Y1Yo9CpzL6rj8IP0BfssEujAvf3Gbf1oi92JRE3s2humFDfPvSlHmRIfWPQ4qFOw1zmlzsV1 eg83gErKbjaDdkbwQA85RTmMVKNVvonM80WB6jAg8tlJ5VlYlpbzASpJRNj+FL1LLBQxCbPU eFwrzqYgNvtdKR7j5nTgdndCxq+2aws/aAjdL10S8yeH7ZOpNPzjDJfMSt/L1O25zPUhXdQC 9AZNYsfyV7rf+POEgVpIEth1fT9WbmS0rZxRd/+y628n31GicbA+teN890vdABEBAAHCwPYE GAEIACAWIQRku8yfm+a9MCUUQgt0bMMiQDuOUAUCYKbanQIbDAAKCRB0bMMiQDuOUF1LC/4q 4pLtmDt6TIET2H7zGj5ie3ng7kC7YqtFPYwgLQzs9WeqQ/5WowEmHOPonBcqhGbtDj22GebQ 7w0RoUHb+aXsbC85I/C+nWgT1ZcfMBTHGlBcIQvOCNG18g87Ha9jgD0HnW4bRUkZmGMpP0Yd TLM+PBNu41AK6z82VPQrfTuPKqwAAS2FK/RpF2xB7rjpETzIPl9Dj9EAkRbviURIg0BQkmej l02FLzGmlTfBIDHBdEgzvD71Z5H9BP8DAbxBzonSTzx/KZyv7njSUzdVLW+5O/WzPgb4Qt4I jQd66LS9HWS1G7AcLjiSQAIf8v7JkX3NwtN+NGX5cmt2p0e9FOOKWXVgCIgPN3/712EEGAgq UUxuPEBD5DrRCgjZL40eHxQza2BAhoVoWopUCGZdCCZJP3iF7818wIph0U393DELG9NAGLJa qkoA8KBimXp9Rd2QvpA864JRy/REoEOEF9lm3clriLyEqaL/VMIQRhl/VSkUuez4Wr68eHus TFdwePg= In-Reply-To: <96DDD887-4AC2-4F11-9B49-5ED6FC3F5FA2@gmx.de> Subject: Re: [NNagain] FCC NOI due dec 1 on broadband speed standards 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: Tue, 14 Nov 2023 19:27:33 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------osKAPOiKooTKyr6z0VO36I3E Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In the beginning days of the Arpanet, circa early 1970s, ARPA made a policy decision about use of the Arpanet.  First, Arpa Program Managers, located on the East Coast of the US, were assigned computer accounts on USC-ISIA, located on the West Coast in LA. Thus to do their work, exchanging email, editting documents, and such, they had to *use* the Arpanet to connect their terminals in Washington to the PDP-10 in California - 3000 miles away. Second, ARPA began requiring all of their contractors (researchers at Universities etc.) to interact with Arpa using email and FTP. If your site was "on the Arpanet", you had to use the Arpanet.  If you wanted your proposal for next year's research to be funded, you had to submit your proposal using the net. This policy caused a profound attention, by everyone involved, to making the Arpanet work and be useful as a collaboration tool. JCR Licklider (aka Lick) was my advisor at MIT, and then my boss when I joined the Research Staff.   Lick had been at ARPA for a while, promoting his vision of a "Galactic Network" that resulted in the Arpanet as a first step.  At MIT, Lick still had need for lots of interactions with others.   My assignment was to build and operate the email system for Lick's group at MIT on our own PDP-10. Lick had a terminal in his office and was online a lot.   If email didn't work, I heard about it.   If the Arpanet didn't work, BBN heard about it. This pressure was part of Arpa policy.   Sometimes it's referred to as "eating your own dog food" -- i.e., making sure your "dog" will get the same kind of nutrition you enjoy.   IMHO, that pressure policy was important, perhaps crucial, to the success of the Arpanet. In the 70s, meetings still occurred, but a lot of progress was made through the use of the Arpanet.   You can only do so much with email and file interactions.  Today, the possibilities for far richer interactions are much more prevalent.   But IMHO they are held back, possibly because no one is feeling the pressure to "make it work". Gigabit throughputs are common, but why does my video and audio still break up...? It's important to have face-to-face meetings, but perhaps if the IETF scheduled a future meeting to be online only, whatever needs to happen to make it work would happen?  Perhaps... Even a "game" might drive progress.  At Interop '92, we resurrected the old "MazeWars" game using computers scattered across the show exhibit halls.  The engineers in the control room above the floor felt the pressure to make sure the Game continued to run.  At the time, the Internet itself was too slow for enjoyable gameplay at any distance.   Will the Internet 30 years later work? Or perhaps the IETF, or ISOC, or someone could take on a highly visible demo involving non-techie end users.   An online meeting of the UN General Assembly?   Or some government bodies - US Congress, British Parliament, etc. Such an event would surface the issues, both technical and policy, to the engineers, corporations, policy-makers, and others who might have the ability and interest to "make it work". Jack On 11/14/23 10:10, Sebastian Moeller wrote: > Hi Jack, > > >> On Nov 14, 2023, at 13:02, Jack Haverty via Nnagain wrote: >> >> If video conferencing worked well enough, they would not have to all get together in one place and would instead hold IETF meetings online ...? > [SM] Turns out that humans are social creatures, and some things work better face-to-face and in the hallway (and if that is only building trust and sympathy) than over any remote technology. > > >> Did anyone measure latency? Does anyone measure throughput of "useful" traffic - e.g., excluding video/audio data that didn't arrive in time to be actually used on the screen or speaker? > [SM] Utility is in the eye of the beholder, no? > > >> Jack Haverty >> >> >> On 11/14/23 09:25, Vint Cerf via Nnagain wrote: >>> if they had not been all together they would have been consuming tons of video capacity doing video conference calls.... >>> >>> :-)) >>> v >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 10:46 AM Livingood, Jason via Nnagain wrote: >>> On the subject of how much bandwidth does one household need, here's a fun stat for you. >>> >>> >>> At the IETF’s 118th meeting last week (Nov 4 – 10, 2023), there were over 1,000 engineers in attendance. At peak there were 870 devices connected to the WiFi network. Peak bandwidth usage: >>> >>> • Downstream peak ~750 Mbps >>> • Upstream ~250 Mbps >>> >>> From my pre-meeting Twitter poll (https://twitter.com/jlivingood/status/1720060429311901873): >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Nnagain mailing list >>> Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net >>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Please send any postal/overnight deliveries to: >>> Vint Cerf >>> Google, LLC >>> 1900 Reston Metro Plaza, 16th Floor >>> Reston, VA 20190 >>> +1 (571) 213 1346 >>> >>> >>> until further notice >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 --------------osKAPOiKooTKyr6z0VO36I3E Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In the beginning days of the Arpanet, circa early 1970s, ARPA made a policy decision about use of the Arpanet.  First, Arpa Program Managers, located on the East Coast of the US, were assigned computer accounts on USC-ISIA, located on the West Coast in LA.  Thus to do their work, exchanging email, editting documents, and such, they had to *use* the Arpanet to connect their terminals in Washington to the PDP-10 in California - 3000 miles away.

Second, ARPA began requiring all of their contractors (researchers at Universities etc.) to interact with Arpa using email and FTP.   If your site was "on the Arpanet", you had to use the Arpanet.  If you wanted your proposal for next year's research to be funded, you had to submit your proposal using the net.

This policy caused a profound attention, by everyone involved, to making the Arpanet work and be useful as a collaboration tool.

JCR Licklider (aka Lick) was my advisor at MIT, and then my boss when I joined the Research Staff.   Lick had been at ARPA for a while, promoting his vision of a "Galactic Network" that resulted in the Arpanet as a first step.  At MIT, Lick still had need for lots of interactions with others.   My assignment was to build and operate the email system for Lick's group at MIT on our own PDP-10.  Lick had a terminal in his office and was online a lot.   If email didn't work, I heard about it.   If the Arpanet didn't work, BBN heard about it.

This pressure was part of Arpa policy.   Sometimes it's referred to as "eating your own dog food" -- i.e., making sure your "dog" will get the same kind of nutrition you enjoy.   IMHO, that pressure policy was important, perhaps crucial, to the success of the Arpanet.

In the 70s, meetings still occurred, but a lot of progress was made through the use of the Arpanet.   You can only do so much with email and file interactions.  Today, the possibilities for far richer interactions are much more prevalent.   But IMHO they are held back, possibly because no one is feeling the pressure to "make it work".   Gigabit throughputs are common, but why does my video and audio still break up...?

It's important to have face-to-face meetings, but perhaps if the IETF scheduled a future meeting to be online only, whatever needs to happen to make it work would happen?  Perhaps...

Even a "game" might drive progress.  At Interop '92, we resurrected the old "MazeWars" game using computers scattered across the show exhibit halls.  The engineers in the control room above the floor felt the pressure to make sure the Game continued to run.  At the time, the Internet itself was too slow for enjoyable gameplay at any distance.   Will the Internet 30 years later work?

Or perhaps the IETF, or ISOC, or someone could take on a highly visible demo involving non-techie end users.   An online meeting of the UN General Assembly?   Or some government bodies - US Congress, British Parliament, etc.

Such an event would surface the issues, both technical and policy, to the engineers, corporations, policy-makers, and others who might have the ability and interest to "make it work".

Jack


On 11/14/23 10:10, Sebastian Moeller wrote:
Hi Jack,



On Nov 14, 2023, at 13:02, Jack Haverty via Nnagain <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:

If video conferencing worked well enough, they would not have to all get together in one place and would instead hold IETF meetings online ...?

	[SM] Turns out that humans are social creatures, and some things work better face-to-face and in the hallway (and if that is only building trust and sympathy) than over any remote technology.



Did anyone measure latency?   Does anyone measure throughput of "useful" traffic - e.g., excluding video/audio data that didn't arrive in time to be actually used on the screen or speaker?

	[SM] Utility is in the eye of the beholder, no?



Jack Haverty


On 11/14/23 09:25, Vint Cerf via Nnagain wrote:

if they had not been all together they would have been consuming tons of video capacity doing video conference calls....

:-))
v


On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 10:46 AM Livingood, Jason via Nnagain <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
On the subject of how much bandwidth does one household need, here's a fun stat for you.

 
At the IETF’s 118th meeting last week (Nov 4 – 10, 2023), there were over 1,000 engineers in attendance. At peak there were 870 devices connected to the WiFi network. Peak bandwidth usage:

	• Downstream peak ~750 Mbps
	• Upstream ~250 Mbps
 
>From my pre-meeting Twitter poll (https://twitter.com/jlivingood/status/1720060429311901873):

<image001.png>

_______________________________________________
Nnagain mailing list
Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain


-- 
Please send any postal/overnight deliveries to:
Vint Cerf
Google, LLC
1900 Reston Metro Plaza, 16th Floor
Reston, VA 20190
+1 (571) 213 1346


until further notice





_______________________________________________
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


    

    

  


--------------osKAPOiKooTKyr6z0VO36I3E--