[e2e] Free Internet & IPv6

[Jon Crowcroft]

classic error - the problem is peak allocation for rare events is running
nets at 40% load so everyone watching youtube/iplayer olympics works but
tha means mean load is < 4%

simple then to give capacity to others during the 23.5 hours we're running
at mean

On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 9:07 PM, Daniel Havey <dhavey at yahoo.com> wrote:

> I wonder why the bandwidth is unused in the first place?  Is it being
> wasted because it is of little value?  What bandwidth are we talking about?
>  I guess that bandwidth as a commodity would have a time and place.
>  Bandwidth on what router and when?
>
> Is it bandwidth on the routers between the cat video community and
> youtube?  Or the bandwidth on some router that nobody wants to use anyways?
>
> Maybe TANSAFL is not so easy to defeat.
>
> ...Daniel
>
>
> --- On Wed, 9/19/12, Jon Crowcroft <jon.crowcroft at cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> From: Jon Crowcroft <jon.crowcroft at cl.cam.ac.uk>
> Subject: Re: [e2e] Free Internet & IPv6
> To: "Fred Baker (fred)" <fred at cisco.com>
> Cc: "Arjuna Sathiaseelan" <arjuna.sathiaseelan at gmail.com>, "<
> end2end-interest at postel.org>" <end2end-interest at postel.org>
> Date: Wednesday, September 19, 2012, 1:20 AM
>
>
> So here's an idea - (pace, Bob Briscoe and Google Adwords)
> Decongestant Adverts (DA - LikeCongestion Exposure, only backwards -
> employing Yet Another Level of Redirection called
> Re-Re-ECN...
>
> bandwidth doesn't have much operational cost - te real cosrt is the shadow
> price of other people's traffic you displace - if there isn't other
> traffic, then the additional cost of carrying yours is little.
>
> So we can have a receiver pays model for capacity - and the way they pay
> is via third party ads..
> now this works very nicely if we observe thatcongesiton exposire requires
> you to transparently reveal where the congestion is - i.e. the source of
> ECN marks...
>
> so the source can also reflect  the receiver to a wiling advertiser site,
> who then sends adverts with ECN-willing-to-pay marks ...
> sine the adverts flow the opposite direction from the traffic they don't
> add to congestion - indeed on many links (e.g. Adsl) there's plenty of
> capacity that way anyway
>
> that way, the net is free at the network layer, not just uo in the clouds
> what say?
> I see a bright new decongested future, full of IP banner ads
>
> j.
> On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 12:25 AM, Fred Baker (fred) <fred at cisco.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sep 18, 2012, at 3:26 PM, Arjuna Sathiaseelan wrote:
>
>
>
> > Lets put the economics aside for a moment. I am more thinking like if
>
> > we can assign a class of IP addresses, where essential government
>
> > services  run, and lets say if the intermediate network devices are
>
> > configured (within the network operators) to recognise that these IP
>
> > addresses can be allowed to access without the client/user to pay,
>
> > then the network operators can always allow access to these services.
>
> > So are there any technological challenges here to realize this? I dont
>
> > think so.
>
>
>
> There's no technical challenge there. It's a business problem. Allocate
> some addresses from the existing pool and use them for a defined service
> such as you're describing.
>
>
>
> What happens next, of course, is that since bandwidth costs money and no
> money is being exchanged, one gets no bandwidth. You've had the experience
> in hotels, no doubt; they offer free wifi in every room, by which they mean
> they have installed wifi APs on a LAN and connected that to some service
> provider. It works just fine as long as you send no packets on it. If you
> decide to send packets, oh, well gee. 20% loss is not a problem, is it?
> It's better than losing ALL of the packets, and after all it's free...
>
>
>
>
> TANSTAAFL...
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.postel.org/pipermail/end2end-interest/attachments/20120919/94cc9254/attachment.html