[Chapter-delegates] Article in The New York Times
Sivasubramanian Muthusamy
isolatedn at gmail.com
Sun Mar 16 01:06:57 PDT 2008
Dear Mike Todd,
It is very true that some or most or all of the internet operators
think of various ways of increasing their profits and it is probable
that they might seek to "control" the overload for profitability
considerations.
But what I have talked about in my mail is about unnecessary router
hops (that happens when the route of data transfer from point A to
point B is circutious. If it makes sense, compare the flight path from
Delhi to San Francisco (assuming a direct, truly non-stop, not even a
fueling stop flight. It is near-linear. But what happens when it comes
to data transfer? Is the distance minimal ?
Infact, often data transfers between point A in Delhi to point B in
Delhi might get routed via San Francisco (just for argument's sake).
While it may be necessary in some situations, it happens unnecessarily
in several other situations.
One practical example is when someone in point A in Delhi talks to a
computer in point B in Delhi via a proxy thousands of miles away.
Another example is when an employee of a company in a certain building
in Delhi talks to a computer in the next cubicle through a connection
to a computer thousands of miles away. ( Again, in some situations it
may be totally necessary, but in several situations it may be
unwarranted )
The points that I have raised are not exhaustive My examples are
incomplete. What I am trying to convey is that there needs to be
scientific study of the traffic pattens, data transfer trends, about
the necessary and unnecessary use of the bandwidth, about what the
earth can bear in terms of internet traffic and what it can not. (
Bandwidth prices are coming down, technology is exploding to make it
possible for billions of users to have 10 or more MBPS of bandwidth
for every user at an affordable cost, but what proportion is
purposeful and what proportion is wasteful ? When electricity was
invented no one thought about the environmental impact of every home
in future using kilowatts of electricity per hour. Excessive Internet
bandwidth usage, some day might mean some form of unknown
environmental impact as well. Take the case of submarines
communicating by sonar signals, suddenly the world discovered that
sonar signals are fatal to blue whales. The harm was unknown until
sometime ago... )
The concern about environmental impact might be a bit fetched, but it
could be one of the aspects that a comprehensive study might take it
as one of the terms of reference.
What is referred to in my message as "control" is not to be taken in
an authoritarian sense. There is no authoritarianism hinted at here.
Rather the term is used akin to "conserve"...
There needs to some balance. There are ways by which balance could be
brought about. There could be creative ways. What if all video and
audio is moved to the TV screen by cable ? ( I am not sure if it would
make any difference, but a seperation of gaming/movies/music from the
"traditional" internet content is technically feasible considering
today's trends of online Video portals tying up with Television/cable
content providers. If online music and video and games move to the
realm of interactive TV screens ???
Again it is not exhausive. There may be a list of such measures, some
desirable, that could be technically feasible and acceptable that may
emerge out of such a comprehensive study of the internet. Even if the
above idea of separation of video content is dismissed as undesirable,
some other solutions to ratonalize or streamline (please don't attach
importance to these terms, nothing negative is implied in the use of
these terms) the internet.
Sivasubramanian M.
On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 8:41 PM, Mike Todd <miketodd at miketodd.com> wrote:
> Things would be quite different if we were talking about the 100 mbps,
> and higher, speed available in countries above us in the list of
> developed countries showing their speeds and costs for users.
>
> My initial reaction to the article was that the only people to benefit
> from trying to "control" the "overload" are those who want to find
> ways of increasing their profits without having to do anything to
> improve the networks...
>
> Mike Todd
> President, Mike Todd Associates - www.MikeTodd.com
> Supporting the Digital Coast
>
> President, Internet Society Los Angeles Chapter - www.ISOC-LA.org
> mtodd at isoc-la.org
>
> Founder, Digital Divide Task Force, www.ddtf.org (currently under
> significant updates)
> miketodd at ddtf.org
>
> Western Research Application Center, Viterbi School of Engineering,
> University of Southern California
>
> Center for Entrepreneurship and Technology Law
> Pepperdine University School of Law
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sivasubramanian Muthusamy" <isolatedn at gmail.com>
> To: "Alejandro Pisanty" <apisan at servidor.unam.mx>
> Cc: "Chapter Delegates" <chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org>
> Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2008 7:41 AM
> Subject: Re: [Chapter-delegates] Article in The New York Times
>
>
> > Dear Sabrina,
> >
> > The article in New York times needs to be examined seriously. The
> > traffic overload, if it may be called so, is one of the aspects that
> > need to be observed and measures identified.
> >
> > 1. It is wonderful to find the content on the net getting richer and
> > richer; it feels good to experience increasing bandwidths as it has
> > progressed from 14.4 KBPS to 56 to the present trend of 11 MBPS or
> > comcast's 16 MBPS, but are we making scientific estimations of
> > average
> > available bandwidth per user for at least the next 10 years
> > (preferably for a longer duration), average bandwidth usage per
> > user,
> > traffic distribution and all other factors that determine the
> > overload
> > ?
> >
> > 2. It is good to download movies, good to upload videos, but while
> > we
> > enjoy the ease of the internet, are we examining unnecessary,
> > redundant traffic ?
> >
> > There are several other aspects that needs to be comprehensively
> > examined. (For example the IPV4 runout problem.)
> >
> > The internet requires an overall blueprint for its growth. Otherwise
> > we may have some unforeseen problems.
> >
> > Sivasubramanian Muthusamy
> > ISOC India Chennai.
> > http://www.isocindiachennai.in ( in process )
> >
> >
> > On 3/14/08, Alejandro Pisanty <apisan at servidor.unam.mx> wrote:
> >> Dear Sabrina, all,
> >>
> >> in discussion last evening during the IETF Plenary, this article
> >> was
> >> mentioned. The discussion was following the presentations about
> >> video and
> >> TV over the Internet by two invited speakers. Probably the
> >> memory-sticking
> >> points are:
> >>
> >> 1. video and TV are taking up about 50% of Internet traffic
> >> already, and
> >> this fraction is growing. The rates of growth are discussed but
> >> somewhere
> >> around 50-55% per year.
> >>
> >> 2. different ways to provide this video are being explored and
> >> none is
> >> find satisfactory by all experts (peer-to-peer and multicasting
> >> are among
> >> the examples.)
> >>
> >> 3. in the US there is a lack of sufficient investment in
> >> broadband; "lack"
> >> or "insufficiency" are defined with respect to expectations for
> >> traffic
> >> and services that will be required, and in comparison too a few
> >> (Northern)
> >> economies in Europe and Asia.
> >>
> >> 4. lesson/message to chapters outside the North: let's look at our
> >> countries' infrastructures and make sure we press for a sufficient
> >> build
> >> of bandwidth at accessible prices and all the way to the users.
> >> This was
> >> not said.
> >>
> >> Yours,
> >>
> >> Alejandro Pisanty
> >>
> >>
> >> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> >> . . .
> >> Dr. Alejandro Pisanty
> >> UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico
> >>
> >> *Mi blog/My blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com
> >> *LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty
> >> *Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn,
> >> http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614
> >>
> >> ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, www.isoc.org
> >> Participa en ICANN, www.icann.org
> >> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> >> . . . .
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, 13 Mar 2008, Sabrina Wilmot wrote:
> >>
> >> > Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 21:01:04 +0000
> >> > From: Sabrina Wilmot <wilmot at isoc.org>
> >> > To: Chapter Delegates <chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org>
> >> > Subject: [Chapter-delegates] Article in The New York Times
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Dear Colleagues
> >> >
> >> > There is an article in today's "New York Times" with a quote
> >> from Fred
> >> > Baker (board member of the Internet Society):
> >> >
> >> > "Video Road Hogs Stir Fear of Internet Traffic Jam"
> >> > By STEVE LOHR
> >> > Caution: Heavy Internet traffic ahead. Delays possible.
> >> >
> >> > http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/13/technology/13net.html
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Enjoy!
> >> >
> >> > Best regards,
> >> > Sabrina Wilmot
> >> > ISOC
> >> >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > Chapter-delegates mailing list
> >> > Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
> >> > http://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
> >> >
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Chapter-delegates mailing list
> >> Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
> >> http://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Sivasubramanian Muthusamy
> > CEO
> > Isolated Networks
> > Whitefield, 389/1 Perundurai Road
> > Erode 638 011
> > Tamilnadu India
> > http://www.isolatednetworks.com
> > email: isolatedn at gmail.com
> > ++91 424 4030334
> > Mobile Phone number +91 99524 03099
> > ++91 424 4030334
> >
> > DISCLAIMER:
> >
> > This message (including attachment if any) from Isolated Networks is
> > confidential and may be privileged. If you have received this
> > message
> > by mistake please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete this
> > message from your system. Any unauthorized use, disclosure or
> > dissemination of this message in whole or in part is strictly
> > prohibited.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Chapter-delegates mailing list
> > Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
> > http://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
> >
> > __________ NOD32 2949 (20080315) Information __________
> >
> > This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
> > http://www.eset.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > __________ NOD32 2949 (20080315) Information __________
> >
> > This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
> > http://www.eset.com
> >
> >
>
>
--
Sivasubramanian Muthusamy
CEO
Isolated Networks
Whitefield, 389/1 Perundurai Road
Erode 638 011
Tamilnadu India
http://www.isolatednetworks.com
email: isolatedn at gmail.com
++91 424 4030334
Mobile Phone number +91 99524 03099
++91 424 4030334
DISCLAIMER:
This message (including attachment if any) from Isolated Networks is
confidential and may be privileged. If you have received this message
by mistake please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete this
message from your system. Any unauthorized use, disclosure or
dissemination of this message in whole or in part is strictly
prohibited.
More information about the Chapter-delegates
mailing list