-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi, Mark,
Mark Baugher wrote:
>
> On 10/08/2009, at 10:33 AM, Joe Touch wrote:
>
>> Users already have many similar things - DHCP, NAT, SSID default to
>> announce, etc. - "on" by default, and they allow the user to shut it off
>> or alter the configuration.
>
> Duplicate DHCP servers and double-NATs are a huge problem for vendors of
> home networking equipment when the unskilled user needs to shut it off.
> The user may need to shut it "off" when upgrading to a new 802.11N AP
> and attaching it to an existing home gateway/router/NAT, for example.
I've seen this sort of thing done lots of places and it works fine.
For any default service, the user *may* need to shut it off, but frankly
fair-sharing is far less intrusive than services that are already
defaulted-on, e.g., NAT, SSID-announce, wifi channel selection, etc.
...
> That's the point I am trying to make. Not that there is anything that is
> particularly complicated in your proposal. Practically every config knob
> on the home network has a cost associated with it, often a large cost.
The cost of what I'm suggesting needs to be compared to the context of
other costs. "fair sharing" does cost CPU and buffer memory, but the
benefit -- esp. to naiive users -- is large. As a configuration
addition, it's in the decimal points compared to most home gateway
capabilities.
- ---
My concern is that home gateways often get used in ways that aren't what
most people think is typical. Kids show up with devices that just
connect. Devices exchange large files without explicit user invocation.
Large groups of devices come and go frequently.
Current home gateways fail on two main points right now:
1) a single user can swamp the pipe
(e.g., updating their facebook page, or doing
a bittorrent xfer without knowing it)
2) flux in the set of users, or large sets of users,
can bring DHCP to its knees
We saw this when we deployed Tethernet (www.isi.edu/tethernet), a
home-gateway style device that has additional features. Even when it
operated as a regular home gateway - even with a ethernet uplink - we
found that having fair sharing ON and having a reasonably robust DHCP
server was useful. We used it to support conferences (Infocom, Sigcomm),
groups of several dozen demos (DARPA PI meetings, DISCEX conference, NSF
meetings), and various other large meetings at hotels and in homes.
None if this is hard, but existing home gateways fall flat on these
points, and it's worth (a) noting and (b) avoiding.
Joe
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iEYEARECAAYFAkqAcgwACgkQE5f5cImnZrsnXACgnDA+FrzpjlNu2Fq2FogNgdpR
apEAmwUZ0yvCAJEjnYPUXmYftpNVuKCw
=8ktG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
