User Empowerment - Flexible Path Selection
From FIpedia
User-empowerment relates to any form of communication in which the user is more than just a consumer. Examples of user-empowerment are already a reality in relation to content, for instance, in which the user is also a provider and a rendezvous point. This user-empowerment perspective leaded to the Web2.0 (r)evolution with a new way of viewing the Internet with applications in the field of social networking, from YouTube to Facebook.
What we would like to discuss is the next potential step in user-empowerment: given users an active role in how information is transferred in the Internet, leading to a *user-centric networking* (r)evolution of the Internet. Within the context of user-centric networking we would like to generate some discussion around two potential disagreements: i) Flexible path selection; ii) Build Your Own Network
This wiki page is focus on the “Flexible Path Selection” issue of user-empowerment. To express your opinion about the issue of “Build Your Own Network” visit the following wiki page: Build-Your-Own-Networks: Does it matter?
More extended view about the Internet (R)evolution can be found in: [1]
The Disagreement: Flexible Path Selection
Networking centered on the user includes user-driven route selection in the context of structured or ad-hoc networks.
Background: What is Flexible Path Selection?
Flexible Path Selection
i) gives users power to decide about the end-to-end paths their traffic should follow ii) gives users power to opportunistically route traffic via their personal devices iii) gives users power to decide about the best strategy to use available access network resources. iv) gives users the power to use different combination of ISPs and network access providers at the service level.
It is important to understand that the term user is broadly used for the consumer of network connectivity and can therefore constitute, e.g., large content providers with significant interest in how their traffic is routed in a global network for a variety of reasons apart from costs.
One realization of flexible path selection is the concept of source routing, which allows a sender of a packet to define the route packets should take in the network?
Viewpoint 1: Flexible path selection is NOT important
Taking into account legal and application-level requirements into large-scale route selection is neither scalable nor doable in runtime of communications to happen. Flexible edge selection is a possibility and outside the scope of path selection. BYON does provider insight in the edge selection but does not matter for path selection.
Viewpoint 2: Flexible path selection is important
Flexibly selection of paths is important since it allows for
i) creating traffic locality by creating shortcuts between different access networks ii) extending Internet coverage with low investment. iii) enabling a more suitable usage of different available resources (e.g spectrum) iv) enabling a source to force packets to travel over one or more paths to prevent congestion. v) taking into account (local) legal constraints of applications with respects to providing services
Viewpoint 3: Flexible path selection is important - but WHERE, WHO, and WHAT in the selection is unclear
The Internet has always been about flexible path selection. Hence, it is NOT an issue of whether or not path selection matters. It is one about WHERE it matters and WHO will have a say in it. [User_Empowerment_-_BYON BYON] is a trend in networking that raises issues around path selection on the very last hop, often leading to (static) agreements between BYON and access provider. But are there cases in which path selection has to happen more in the core of the network, up to fully supporting source-based routing? WHO is making this decision? The (user-facing application) end point? The (service-provider facing) application end point? The end user? What are the criteria that are taking into account? And last but not least: how could we do flexible path selection that (potentially) opens up all parts of the path to flexible selection?
Moderator
Paulo Mendes
Leave a Comment
David Clark said ...
Jtw said ...
Agree with Dave. Based on common usage of the phrase "user empowerment" I expected the topic to be about giving users more choice within the context of structured ISP networks (eg, user-driven route selection, competitive service selection, etc). This page looks to be more about mesh networking and so on. It's interesting to think about overlap, but they're not the same thing..
--Jtw 20:47, 25 June 2009 (EDT)
Dpapadimitriou said ...
The term "user" has a specific connotation (enslavement from "user" towards the "network") that is antagonistic to the people / community empowerement enabled by the Internet.
It becomes indeed a cricital question: are we going to assist to a step back compared to what already Internet enables ? What would be the incentive and actual value for people to take such direction ?
--Dpapadimitriou 07:20, 11 July 2009 (EDT)
Dirktrossen said ...
Does 'user-provided networking/infra' really constitute user empowerment? What about other forms of empowerment, such as route selection (as pointed out) or issues related to identity or information disclosure? It might be best to focus the discussion around the more concrete topic of user-provided networking (infra)?!
--Dirktrossen 11:41, 14 July 2009 (EDT)
Paulo Mendes said ...
Based on the received comment, the current wiki page was restructured in order to focus the attention on the user-centric networking of user empowerment. Within the topic of user-centric networking, two disagreements were identified… The current user-empowerment wiki page focuses on a couple of viewpoints of the identified two potential disagreements.
--Paulo Mendes 19:47, 4 August 2009 (EDT)
Borka said ...
I believe that this topic is important if it is understood as a possibility for more choice and flexibility within the current context of structured ISP structure. This may help sometimes to fight more esaily very restrictive regulations imposed by the country regulators: e.g. Russia is currently preparing law to ban Skype communication in order to defend the market position of national mobile operators. Another case is the Iranian post election revolt. The technology must help for a way out and keep the network open.
--Borka 05:53, 21 August 2009 (EDT)
Rsofia said ...
The term normally applied to this type of discussion not only from the perspective of the user but also from telcos is "user-centricity". User-centricity relates not only to Quality of Experience or user expectations (which impact flexible path decisions and others) but also to the need for the access to become "user-centric" in the sense that access functionality should be devised having in mind the user. For instance, mechanisms to assist single-sign on; access architectures capable of coping with different service delivery/distribution models simultaneously; multihoming; global security.
--Rsofia 19:04, 3 October 2009 (EDT)
Dirktrossen said ...
we need to be careful here: a question on 'does it matter or not' can potentially be easily decided through 'yes, sure' but the more subtle issue is 'where will it matter'? For instance, the BYON trend mainly addresses this issue on the very last hop and is a particular view on this issue, very often solved by (static) agreements between BYON provider and access provider. But is there a more general question around path selection that needs addressing through, e.g., the variety of legal frameworks, the necessity to support highly application (even information item) specific policies in path selection, etc? In this, can and will BYON be a trigger for driving such issues forward or is it just a blip that is successfully countered by incumbents to retain the status quo? What is the evidence for these questions?
--Dirktrossen 03:09, 16 November 2009 (EST)
The first viewpoint seems to equate user empowerment with user-centric networking, or BYOI networking. It seems to me that the topic is broader than that, so perhaps we need a prefatory conversation about what disagreement is being solicited here.
--Ddc 20:04, 21 June 2009 (EDT)