<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Times New Roman \(Body CS\)";
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style>
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72" style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p style="margin:0in"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">> They may start MITM's https connections to read traffic
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in"><span style="font-size:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">Unless they install certs on client devices how are they going to attack the TLS connections?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in"><span style="font-size:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in;overflow-wrap: break-word"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">> They may start blocking bittorrent because they claim it's all "piracy" and theft.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in"><span style="font-size:12.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">FWIW, that was not why P2P connections were reset way back when. It was at root a bufferbloat issue, confounded by a lot of bad responses to & misunderstandings of the issue at that time. ;-)
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in"><span style="font-size:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">But you do raise an interesting point that what’s considered a reasonable network management practice differs by type of access network – which we can see in the US between wired and wireless access network
practices. What may become standard practice in LEO access networks is still emerging I suppose.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in"><span style="font-size:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">> This always comes with some argument that "bundling" a provider-controlled service
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in"><span style="font-size:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">I’d guess the fastest path to deploy a MVP was to keep the edge access device as simple as possible and not worry about testing lots of permutations. So getting to market with 1 device makes sense IMO. What
the future holds is anyone’s guess – but ISTM they are still fairly early in deployment.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in"><span style="font-size:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">JL<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="margin:0in"><span style="font-size:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>