[cooperation-wg] cooperation-wg Digest, Vol 27, Issue 6 (EP "Connected Continent" and Internet Fast Lane provisions?)

Unfortunately the EP is not so sophisticated.
In any case, art. 23,(2) of the proposed reform states the following with regard to potential degradation of best effort Internet:

2. Providers of internet access, of electronic communications to the public and providers of content, applications and services shall be free to offer specialized services to end-users. Such services shall only be offered if the network capacity is sufficient to provide them in addition to internet access services and they are not to the material detriment of the availability or quality of internet access services.  Providers of internet access to end-users shall not discriminate between such services.





-----------------------------------------
Innocenzo Genna
Genna Cabinet Sprl 
1050 Bruxelles - Belgium

Skype: 	innonews
Twitter:	@InnoGenna
Email: 	inno at innogenna.it

my blog:http://radiobruxelleslibera.wordpress.com/
my music: www.innocenzogenna.com 



Il giorno 20/mar/2014, alle ore 15:33, Matthew Ford <ford at isoc.org> ha scritto:

> Hi Patrik, all,
> 
> On 19 Mar 2014, at 23:44, Patrik Fältström <paf at frobbit.se> wrote:
> 
>> Agree, but that VPN can not be delivered (over the same IP based
>> network) as internet access without the internet access being degraded.
>> That is what I read the text say. And my point is that what this results
>> in is that the customer of the internet access should continue to get
>> whatever service they bought, irrespectively if some VPN service or
>> whatever is transported in the same shared physical medium, L2 or L3
>> network.
>> 
> 
> For me, this boils down to Internet access not typically being sold with any guarantee of minimum service quality. So how do you define degraded? TDC's recent announcement is interesting in this light: http://www.telegeography.com/products/commsupdate/articles/2014/02/17/tdc-introduces-guaranteed-broadband-access-speeds/
> 
> I'll also note that BEREC is currently consulting (http://berec.europa.eu/eng/news_consultations/ongoing_public_consultations/) on this document:
> http://berec.europa.eu/files/document_register_store/2014/3/BoR%20(14)%2024%20Draft%20BEREC%20Report%20on%20NN%20QoS%20Monitoring%20Report.pdf
> 
> which includes this:
> “BEREC recommends that NRAs increasingly put emphasis on evaluating performance of IAS as a whole, to assess potential degradation due to specialised services.”
> 
> Regards,
> Mat
> 
> 
>> If that is what the intention is, why do they not write that?
>> 
>>  Patrik
>> 
>> On 2014-03-20 00:30, Innocenzo Genna wrote:
>>> In my opinion, that kind of specialized  services are a VPN. It’s no
>>> Internet.
>>> 
>>> -----------------------------------------
>>> Innocenzo Genna
>>> *Genna Cabinet Sprl *
>>> 1050 Bruxelles - Belgium
>>> 
>>> Skype: innonews
>>> Twitter:@InnoGenna
>>> Email: inno at innogenna.it <mailto:inno at innogenna.it>
>>> 
>>> my blog:http://radiobruxelleslibera.wordpress.com/
>>> <http://radiobruxelleslibera.wordpress.com/>
>>> my music: www.innocenzogenna.com <http://www.innocenzogenna.com> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Il giorno 20/mar/2014, alle ore 00:03, Patrik Fältström <paf at frobbit.se
>>> <mailto:paf at frobbit.se>> ha scritto:
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 2014-03-19 20:13, Gordon Lennox wrote:
>>>>> On 19 Mar, 2014, at 18:34, Innocenzo Genna <inno at innogenna.it
>>>>> <mailto:inno at innogenna.it>
>>>>> <mailto:inno at innogenna.it>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 15) “specialized service” means an electronic communications
>>>>>> service */optimized for /*specific content, applications or services,
>>>>>> or a combination thereof, */provided over logically distinct capacity
>>>>>> and relying on strict admission control from end to end/*. It is not
>>>>>> marketed or */usable/* as a substitute for internet access service;
>>>>>> [its application layer is not functionally identical to services and
>>>>>> applications available over the public internet access service;]
>>>>> 
>>>>> And that, particularly if the specialised service uses IP, is the
>>>>> problem?
>>>>> 
>>>>> And end-to-end means to a particular device or, more probably, an end
>>>>> network controlled by the service supplier.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I stopped liking "end-to-end" sometime back.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> I have no idea what and how to implement technically what they talk
>>>> about as "specialices service that does not impcat...".
>>>> 
>>>> In a packet based network, if the outgoing interface is not full, all
>>>> packets will be forwarded as soon as possible.
>>>> 
>>>> If the outgoing interface is full, then one can either queue all packets
>>>> equally (M/M/1 queuing theory) or one can have multiple queues (M/M/N).
>>>> If one have a specialized service that have some special treatment, then
>>>> by definition that implies longer delay on other queues (as packets get
>>>> reordered).
>>>> 
>>>> Now, there are some special cases as well where the _services_ sold can
>>>> be different (i.e. some business connection with some SLA that is higher
>>>> than some SLA for end users paying less).
>>>> 
>>>> What I think is sad is that they did not stop at saying for example:
>>>> 
>>>> - Each provider of a service is required to always deliver to their
>>>> customers the service they have promised to deliver. (Regardless of what
>>>> other services they deliver to other customers on the same network...)
>>>> 
>>>> Not any silly end-to-end. No silly "specialized service" etc.
>>>> 
>>>> Then in other paragraphs they already (if I remember correctly) have
>>>> wording about equal treatment, dominant provider of services etc.
>>>> 
>>>> Patrik
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/cooperation-wg/attachments/20140320/e41a0406/attachment.html>