draft-ietf-lmap-use-cases-05.txt   draft-ietf-lmap-use-cases-06.txt 
INTERNET-DRAFT Marc Linsner INTERNET-DRAFT Marc Linsner
Intended Status: Informational Cisco Systems Intended Status: Informational Cisco Systems
Expires: May 14, 2015 Philip Eardley Expires: August 15, 2015 Philip Eardley
Trevor Burbridge Trevor Burbridge
BT BT
Frode Sorensen Frode Sorensen
NPT Nkom
November 10, 2014 February 11, 2015
Large-Scale Broadband Measurement Use Cases Large-Scale Broadband Measurement Use Cases
draft-ietf-lmap-use-cases-05 draft-ietf-lmap-use-cases-06
Abstract Abstract
Measuring broadband performance on a large scale is important for Measuring broadband performance on a large scale is important for
network diagnostics by providers and users, as well as for public network diagnostics by providers and users, as well as for public
policy. Understanding the various scenarios and users of measuring policy. Understanding the various scenarios and users of measuring
broadband performance is essential to development of the Large-scale broadband performance is essential to development of the Large-scale
Measurement of Broadband Performance (LMAP) framework, information Measurement of Broadband Performance (LMAP) framework, information
model and protocol. This document details two use cases that can model and protocol. This document details two use cases that can
assist to developing that framework. The details of the measurement assist to developing that framework. The details of the measurement
skipping to change at page 2, line 7 skipping to change at page 2, line 7
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
Copyright and License Notice Copyright and License Notice
Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
skipping to change at page 2, line 34 skipping to change at page 2, line 34
2.1 Internet Service Provider (ISP) Use Case . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.1 Internet Service Provider (ISP) Use Case . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2 Regulator Use Case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.2 Regulator Use Case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3 Details of ISP Use Case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3 Details of ISP Use Case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1 Understanding the quality experienced by customers . . . . . 5 3.1 Understanding the quality experienced by customers . . . . . 5
3.2 Understanding the impact and operation of new devices and 3.2 Understanding the impact and operation of new devices and
technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.3 Design and planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.3 Design and planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.4 Monitoring Service Level Agreements . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.4 Monitoring Service Level Agreements . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.5 Identifying, isolating and fixing network problems . . . . . 7 3.5 Identifying, isolating and fixing network problems . . . . . 7
4 Details of Regulator Use Case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 4 Details of Regulator Use Case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.1 Promoting competition through transparency . . . . . . . . . 8 4.1 Providing transparent performance information . . . . . . . 8
4.2 Promoting broadband deployment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4.2 Measuring broadband deployment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.3 Monitoring "net neutrality" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4.3 Monitoring traffic management practices . . . . . . . . . . 9
5 Implementation Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 6 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 7 Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
7 Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 8 IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
8 IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
1 Introduction 1 Introduction
This document describes two use cases for the Large-scale Measurement This document describes two use cases for the Large-scale Measurement
of Broadband Performance (LMAP). The use cases contained in this of Broadband Performance (LMAP). The use cases contained in this
document are (1) the Internet Service Provider Use Case and (2) the document are (1) the Internet Service Provider Use Case and (2) the
Regulator Use Case. In the first, a network operator wants to Regulator Use Case. In the first, a network operator wants to
understand the performance of the network and the quality experienced understand the performance of the network and the quality experienced
by customers, whilst in the second, a regulator wants to provide by customers, whilst in the second, a regulator wants to provide
information on the performance of the ISPs in their jurisdiction. information on the performance of the ISPs in their jurisdiction.
There are other use cases that are not the focus of the initial LMAP There are other use cases that are not the focus of the initial LMAP
work, for example end users would like to use measurements to help work, for example end users would like to use measurements to help
identify problems in their home network and to monitor the identify problems in their home network and to monitor the
performance of their broadband provider; it is expected that the same performance of their broadband provider; it is expected that the same
mechanisms are applicable. mechanisms are applicable.
Large-scale measurements raise several security concerns, including
privacy issues. These are summarized in Section 7 and considered in
further detail in [framework].
2 Use Cases 2 Use Cases
From the LMAP perspective, there is no difference between fixed From the LMAP perspective, there is no difference between fixed
service and mobile (cellular) service used for Internet access. service and mobile (cellular) service used for Internet access.
Hence, like measurements will take place on both fixed and mobile Hence, like measurements will take place on both fixed and mobile
networks. Fixed services include technologies like Digital networks. Fixed services include technologies like Digital
Subscriber Line (DSL), Cable, and Carrier Ethernet. Mobile services Subscriber Line (DSL), Cable, and Carrier Ethernet. Mobile services
include all those advertised as 2G, 3G, 4G, and Long-Term Evolution include all those advertised as 2G, 3G, 4G, and Long-Term Evolution
(LTE). A metric defined to measure end-to-end services will execute (LTE). A metric defined to measure end-to-end services will execute
similarly on all access technologies. Other metrics may be access similarly on all access technologies. Other metrics may be access
skipping to change at page 4, line 12 skipping to change at page 4, line 15
or with a third party application service instead of with their or with a third party application service instead of with their
broadband (BB) product. broadband (BB) product.
o Design and planning. Through monitoring the end user experience o Design and planning. Through monitoring the end user experience
the ISP can design and plan their network to ensure specified the ISP can design and plan their network to ensure specified
levels of user experience. Services may be moved closer to end levels of user experience. Services may be moved closer to end
users, services upgraded, the impact of QoS assessed or more users, services upgraded, the impact of QoS assessed or more
capacity deployed at certain locations. Service Level Agreements capacity deployed at certain locations. Service Level Agreements
(SLAs) may be defined at network or product boundaries. (SLAs) may be defined at network or product boundaries.
o Understanding the quality experienced by customers. Alongside o Understanding the quality experienced by customers. The network
benchmarking competitors, gaining better insight into the user's operator would like to gain better insight into the end-to-end
service through a sample panel of the operator's own customers. performance experienced by its customers. "End-to-end" could, for
The ISP requires a performance viewpoint of the end-to-end instance, incorporate home and enterprise networks, and the impact
perspective, which includes: home/enterprise networks; peering of peering, caching and Content Delivery Networks (CDNs).
points; Content Delivery Networks (CDNs); etc.
o Understanding the impact and operation of new devices and o Understanding the impact and operation of new devices and
technology. As a new product is deployed, or a new technology technology. As a new product is deployed, or a new technology
introduced into the network, it is essential that its operation introduced into the network, it is essential that its operation
and its impact is measured. This also helps to quantify the and its impact is measured. This also helps to quantify the
advantage that the new technology is bringing and support the advantage that the new technology is bringing and support the
business case for larger roll-out. business case for larger roll-out.
2.2 Regulator Use Case 2.2 Regulator Use Case
Regulators in jurisdictions around the world are responding to A regulator may want to evaluate the performance of the Internet
consumers' adoption of Internet access services for traditional access services offered by operators.
telecommunications and media services by promoting competition among
providers of electronic communications, to ensure that users derive
maximum benefit in terms of choice, price, and quality.
Competition is more effective with better information, so some
regulators have developed large-scale measurement programs. For
example, programs such as the U.S. Federal Communications
Commission's (FCC) Measuring Broadband America (MBA), European
Commission's Quality of Broadband Services in the EU reports and a
growing list of other programs employ a diverse set of operational
and technical approaches to gathering data to perform analysis and
reporting on diverse aspects of broadband performance.
While each jurisdiction responds to distinct consumer, industry, and While each jurisdiction responds to distinct consumer, industry, and
regulatory concerns, much commonality exists in the need to produce regulatory concerns, much commonality exists in the need to produce
datasets that can be used to compare multiple Internet access service datasets that can be used to compare multiple Internet access service
providers, diverse technical solutions, geographic and regional providers, diverse technical solutions, geographic and regional
distributions, and marketed and provisioned levels and combinations distributions, and marketed and provisioned levels and combinations
of broadband Internet access services. In some jurisdictions, the of broadband Internet access services.
role of measuring is provided by a measurement provider.
Measurement providers measure network performance from users towards
multiple content and application providers, including dedicated test
measurement servers, to show the performance of the actual Internet
access service provided by different ISPs. Users need to know the
performance that they are achieving from their own ISP. In addition,
they need to know the performance of other ISPs of same location as
background information for selecting their ISP. Measurement providers
will provide measurement results with associated measurement methods
and measurement metrics.
From a consumer perspective, the differentiation between fixed and Regulators may want to publish performance measures of different ISPs
mobile (cellular) Internet access services is blurring as the as background information for end users. They may also want to track
applications used are very similar. Hence, regulators are measuring the growth of high-speed broadband deployment, or to monitor the
both fixed and mobile Internet access services. traffic management practices of Internet providers.
A regulator's role in the development and enforcement of broadband A regulator's role in the development and enforcement of broadband
Internet access service policies also requires that the measurement Internet access service policies requires that the measurement
approaches meet a high level of verifiability, accuracy and provider- approaches meet a high level of verifiability, accuracy and provider-
independence to support valid and meaningful comparisons of Internet independence to support valid and meaningful comparisons of Internet
access service performance. access service performance. Standards can help regulators' shared
needs for scalable, cost-effective, scientifically robust solutions
LMAP standards could answer regulators shared needs by providing to the measurement and collection of broadband Internet access
scalable, cost-effective, scientifically robust solutions to the service performance information.
measurement and collection of broadband Internet access service
performance information.
3 Details of ISP Use Case 3 Details of ISP Use Case
3.1 Understanding the quality experienced by customers 3.1 Understanding the quality experienced by customers
Operators want to understand the quality of experience (QoE) of their Operators want to understand the quality of experience (QoE) of their
broadband customers. The understanding can be gained through a broadband customers. The understanding can be gained through a
"panel", i.e. measurement probes deployed to a few 100 or 1000 "panel", i.e. measurement probes deployed to several customers. A
customers. The panel needs to include a representative sample for probe is a device or piece of software that makes measurements and
each of the operator's technologies (fiber, Hybrid Fibre-coaxial reports the results, under the control of the measurement system.
(HFC), DSL...) and broadband speeds (80Mb/s, 20Mb/s, basic...). For Implementation options are discussed in Section 5. The panel needs to
reasonable statistical validity, approximately 100 probes are needed include a representative sample of the operator's technologies and
for each ISP product. The operator would like the end-to-end view of broadband speeds. For instance it might encompass speeds ranging from
the service, rather than (say) just the access portion. So as well as sub 8Mbps to over 100Mbps. The operator would like the end-to-end
simple network statistics like speed and loss rates, they want to view of the service, rather than just the access portion. This
understand what the service feels like to the customer. This involves involves relating the pure network parameters to something like a
relating the pure network parameters to something like a 'mean 'mean opinion score' [MOS] which will be service dependent (for
opinion score' which will be service dependent (for instance web instance web browsing QoE is largely determined by latency above a
browsing QoE is largely determined by latency above a few Mb/s). few Mb/s).
An operator will also want compound metrics such as "reliability", An operator will also want compound metrics such as "reliability",
which might involve packet loss, DNS failures, re-training of the which might involve packet loss, DNS failures, re-training of the
line, video streaming under-runs etc. line, video streaming under-runs etc.
The operator really wants to understand the end-to-end service The operator really wants to understand the end-to-end service
experience. However, the home network (Ethernet, WiFi, powerline) is experience. However, the home network (Ethernet, WiFi, powerline) is
highly variable and outside its control. To date, operators (and highly variable and outside its control. To date, operators (and
regulators) have instead measured performance from the home gateway. regulators) have instead measured performance from the home gateway.
However, mobile operators clearly must include the wireless link in However, mobile operators clearly must include the wireless link in
skipping to change at page 6, line 35 skipping to change at page 6, line 14
and by sales and marketing. and by sales and marketing.
3.2 Understanding the impact and operation of new devices and technology 3.2 Understanding the impact and operation of new devices and technology
Another type of measurement is to test new capabilities before they Another type of measurement is to test new capabilities before they
are rolled out. For example, the operator may want to: are rolled out. For example, the operator may want to:
o Check whether a customer can be upgraded to a new broadband o Check whether a customer can be upgraded to a new broadband
option option
o Understand the impact of IPv6 before it makes it available to o Understand the impact of IPv6 before it is made available to
customers (will v6 packets get through, what will the latency be customers. Questions such as these could be assessed: will v6
to major websites, what transition mechanisms will be most packets get through? what will the latency be to major websites?
appropriate?) what transition mechanisms will be most appropriate?
o Check whether a new capability can be signaled using TCP options o Check whether a new capability can be signaled using TCP options
(how often it will be blocked by a middlebox? - along the lines of (how often it will be blocked by a middlebox? - along the lines of
the experiments described in [ExtendTCP]); the experiments described in [Extend TCP]);
o Investigate a quality of service mechanism (e.g. checking o Investigate a quality of service mechanism (e.g. checking
whether Diffserv markings are respected on some path); and so on. whether Diffserv markings are respected on some path); and so on.
3.3 Design and planning 3.3 Design and planning
Operators can use large scale measurements to help with their network Operators can use large scale measurements to help with their network
planning - proactive activities to improve the network. planning - proactive activities to improve the network.
For example, by probing from several different vantage points the For example, by probing from several different vantage points the
skipping to change at page 8, line 34 skipping to change at page 8, line 12
A more extensive deployment of the measurement capability to every A more extensive deployment of the measurement capability to every
broadband line would enable an operator to identify issues unique to broadband line would enable an operator to identify issues unique to
a single customer. Overall, large-scale measurements can help an a single customer. Overall, large-scale measurements can help an
operator help an operator fix the fault more rapidly and/or allow the operator help an operator fix the fault more rapidly and/or allow the
affected customers to be informed what's happening. More accurate affected customers to be informed what's happening. More accurate
information enables the operator to reassure customers and take more information enables the operator to reassure customers and take more
rapid and effective action to cure the problem. rapid and effective action to cure the problem.
Often customers experience poor broadband due to problems in the home Often customers experience poor broadband due to problems in the home
network - the ISP's network is fine. For example they may have moved network - the ISP's network is fine. For example they may have moved
too far away from their wireless access point. Perhaps 80% of too far away from their wireless access point. Anecdotally, a large
customer calls about fixed BB problems are due to in-home wireless fraction of customer calls about fixed BB problems are due to in-home
issues. These issues are expensive and frustrating for an operator, wireless issues. These issues are expensive and frustrating for an
as they are extremely hard to diagnose and solve. The operator would operator, as they are extremely hard to diagnose and solve. The
like to narrow down whether the problem is in the home (with the home operator would like to narrow down whether the problem is in the home
network or edge device or home gateway), in the operator's network, (with the home network or edge device or home gateway), in the
or with an application service. The operator would like two operator's network, or with an application service. The operator
capabilities. Firstly, self-help tools that customers use to improve would like two capabilities. Firstly, self-help tools that customers
their own service or understand its performance better, for example use to improve their own service or understand its performance
to re-position their devices for better WiFi coverage. Secondly, on- better, for example to re-position their devices for better WiFi
demand tests that can the operator can run instantly - so the call coverage. Secondly, on-demand tests that can the operator can run
center person answering the phone (or e-chat) could trigger a test instantly - so the call center person answering the phone (or e-chat)
and get the result whilst the customer is still in an on-line could trigger a test and get the result whilst the customer is still
session. in an on-line session.
4 Details of Regulator Use Case 4 Details of Regulator Use Case
4.1 Promoting competition through transparency 4.1 Providing transparent performance information
Competition plays a vital role in regulation of the electronic
communications markets. For competition to successfully discipline
operators' behavior in the interests of their customers, end users
must be fully aware of the characteristics of the ISPs' access
offers. In some jurisdictions regulators mandate that transparent
information imade available about service offers.
End users need effective transparency to be able to make informed Some regulators publish information about the quality of the various
choices throughout the different stages of their relationship with Internet access services provided in their national market. Quality
ISPs, when selecting Internet access service offers, and when information about service offers could include speed, delay, and
considering switching service offer within an ISP or to an jitter. Such information can be published to facilitate end users'
alternative ISP. Quality information about service offers could choice of service provider and offer. Regulators may also check the
include speed, delay, and jitter. Regulators can publish such accuracy of the marketing claims of Internet service providers, and
information to facilitate end users' choice of service provider and may also encourage ISPs all to use the same metrics in their service
offer. It may also encourage ISPs to use the same metrics in their level contracts. The goal with these transparency mechanisms is to
service level contracts, which would further help end users to choose promote competition for end users and potentially also help content,
an ISP. Finally, transparency may help content, application, service application, service and device providers develop their Internet
and device providers develop their Internet offerings. offerings.
The published information needs to be: The published information needs to be:
o Accurate - the measurement results must be correct and not o Accurate - the measurement results must be correct and not
influenced by errors or side effects. The results should be influenced by errors or side effects. The results should be
reproducible and consistent over time. reproducible and consistent over time.
o Comparable - common metrics should be used across different o Comparable - common metrics should be used across different ISPs
ISPs and service offerings so that measurement results can be and service offerings, and over time, so that measurement results
compared. can be compared.
o Meaningful - the metrics used for measurements need to reflect o Meaningful - the metrics used for measurements need to reflect
what end users value about their broadband Internet access service what end users value about their broadband Internet access
service.
o Reliable - the number and distribution of measurement agents, o Reliable - the number and distribution of measurement agents,
and the statistical processing of the raw measurement data, needs and the statistical processing of the raw measurement data, needs
to be appropriate to be appropriate.
A set of measurement parameters and associated measurement methods
are used over time, e.g. speed, delay, and jitter. Then the
measurement raw data are collected and go through statistical post-
processing before the results can be published in an Internet access
service quality index to facilitate end users' choice of service
provider and offer.
The regulator can also promote competition through transparency by
encouraging end users to monitor the performance of their own
broadband Internet access service. They might use this information to
check that the performance meets that specified in their contract or
to understand whether their current subscription is the most
appropriate.
4.2 Promoting broadband deployment
Governments sometimes set strategic goals for high-speed broadband
penetration as an important component of the economic, cultural and
social development of the society. To evaluate the effect of the
stimulated growth over time, broadband Internet access take-up and
penetration of high-speed access can be monitored through measurement
campaigns.
An example of such an initiative is the "Digital Agenda for Europe"
which was adopted in 2010, to achieve universal broadband access. The
goal is to achieve by 2020, access for all Europeans to Internet
access speeds of 30 Mbps or above, and 50% or more of European
households subscribing to Internet connections above 100 Mbps.
To monitor actual broadband Internet access performance in a specific
country or a region, extensive measurement campaigns are needed. A
panel can be built based on operators and packages in the market,
spread over urban, suburban and rural areas. Probes can then be
distributed to the participants of the campaign.
Periodic tests running on the probes can for example measure actual In practical terms, the regulators may measure network performance
speed at peak and off-peak hours, but also other detailed quality from users towards multiple content and application providers,
metrics like delay and jitter. Collected data goes afterwards through including dedicated test measurement servers. Measurement probes are
statistical analysis, deriving estimates for the whole population distributed to a 'panel' of selected end users. The panel covers all
which can then be presented and published regularly. the operators and packages in the market, spread over urban, suburban
and rural areas, and often includes both fixed and mobile Internet
access. Periodic tests running on the probes can for example measure
actual speed at peak and off-peak hours, but also other detailed
quality metrics like delay and jitter. Collected data goes afterwards
through statistical analysis, deriving estimates for the whole
population. Summary information, such as a service quality index, is
published regularly, perhaps alongside more detailed information.
Using a harmonized or standardized measurement methodology, or even a The regulator can also facilitate end users to monitor the
common quality measurement platform, measurement results could also performance of their own broadband Internet access service. They
be used for benchmarking of providers and/or countries. might use this information to check that the performance meets that
specified in their contract or to understand whether their current
subscription is the most appropriate.
4.3 Monitoring "net neutrality" 4.2 Measuring broadband deployment
Regulatory approaches related to net neutrality and the open Internet Regulators may also want to monitor the improvement through time of
has been introduced in some jurisdictions. Examples of such efforts actual broadband Internet access performance in a specific country or
are the Internet policy as outlined by the Body of European a region. The motivation is often to evaluate the effect of the
Regulators for Electronic Communications Guidelines for quality of stimulated growth over time, when government has set a strategic goal
service [BEREC Guidelines] and US FCC Preserving the Open Internet for high-speed broadband deployment, whether in absolute terms or
Report and Order [FCC R&O]. Although legal challenges can change the benchmarked against other countries. An example of such an initiative
status of policy such as the court action negating the FCC R&O, the is [DAE]. The actual measurements can be made in the same way as
take-away for LMAP purposes is that policy-makers are looking for described in Section 4.1.
measurement solutions to assist them in discovering biased treatment
of traffic flows. The exact definitions and requirements vary from
one jurisdiction to another; the comments below provide some hints
about the potential role of measurements.
Net neutrality regulations do not necessarily require every packet to 4.3 Monitoring traffic management practices
be treated equally. Typically they allow "reasonable" traffic
management (for example if there is exceptional congestion) and allow
"specialized services" in parallel to, but separate from, ordinary
Internet access (for example for facilities-based IPTV). A regulator
may want to monitor such practices as input to the regulatory
evaluation. However, these concepts are evolving and differ across
jurisdictions, so measurement results should be assessed with
caution.
A regulator could monitor departures from application agnosticism A regulator may want to monitor traffic management practices or
such as blocking or throttling of traffic from specific applications, compare the performance of Internet access service with specialized
and preferential treatment of specific applications. A measurement services offered in parallel to but separate from Internet access
system could send, or passively monitor, application-specific traffic service (for example IPTV). A regulator could monitor for
and then measure in detail the transfer of the different packets. departures from application agnosticism such as blocking or
Whilst it is relatively easy to measure port blocking, it is a throttling of traffic from specific applications, or preferential
research topic how to detect other types of differentiated treatment. treatment of specific applications. A measurement system could send,
The paper, "Glasnost: Enabling End Users to Detect Traffic or passively monitor, application-specific traffic and then measure
Differentiation" [M-Labs NSDI 2010] and follow-on tool "Glasnost" in detail the transfer of the different packets. Whilst it is
[Glasnost] are examples of work in this area. relatively easy to measure port blocking, it is a research topic how
to detect other types of differentiated treatment. The paper,
"Glasnost: Enabling End Users to Detect Traffic Differentiation" [M-
Labs NSDI 2010] and follow-on tool "Glasnost" [Glasnost] is an
example of work in this area.
A regulator could also monitor the performance of the broadband A regulator could also monitor the performance of the broadband
service over time, to try and detect if the specialized service is service over time, to try and detect if the specialized service is
provided at the expense of the Internet access service. Comparison provided at the expense of the Internet access service. Comparison
between ISPs or between different countries may also be relevant for between ISPs or between different countries may also be relevant for
this kind of evaluation. this kind of evaluation.
5 Implementation Options The motivation for a regulator monitoring such traffic management
practices is that regulatory approaches related to net neutrality and
the open Internet have been introduced in some jurisdictions.
Examples of such efforts are the Internet policy as outlined by the
Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications Guidelines
for quality of service [BEREC Guidelines] and US FCC Preserving the
Open Internet Report and Order [FCC R&O]. Although legal challenges
can change the status of policy, the take-away for LMAP purposes is
that policy-makers are looking for measurement solutions to assist
them in discovering biased treatment of traffic flows. The exact
definitions and requirements vary from one jurisdiction to another.
5 Implementation Options
There are several ways of implementing a measurement system. The There are several ways of implementing a measurement system. The
choice may be influenced by the details of the particular use case choice may be influenced by the details of the particular use case
and what the most important criteria are for the regulator, ISP or and what the most important criteria are for the regulator, ISP or
third party operating the measurement system. third party operating the measurement system.
One way involves a special hardware device that is connected directly One type of probe is a special hardware device that is connected
to the home gateway. The devices are deployed to a carefully selected directly to the home gateway. The devices are deployed to a carefully
panel of end users and they perform measurements according to a selected panel of end users and they perform measurements according
defined schedule. The schedule can run throughout the day, to allow to a defined schedule. The schedule can run throughout the day, to
continuous assessment of the network. Careful design ensures that allow continuous assessment of the network. Careful design ensures
measurements do not detrimentally impact the home user experience or that measurements do not detrimentally impact the home user
corrupt the results by testing when the user is also using the experience or corrupt the results by testing when the user is also
broadband line. The system is therefore tightly controlled by the using the broadband line. The system is therefore tightly controlled
operator of the measurement system. One advantage of this approach is by the operator of the measurement system. One advantage of this
that it is possible to get reliable benchmarks for the performance of approach is that it is possible to get reliable benchmarks for the
a network with only a few devices. One disadvantage is that it would performance of a network with only a few devices. One disadvantage is
be expensive to deploy hardware devices on a mass scale sufficient to that it would be expensive to deploy hardware devices on a mass scale
understand the performance of the network at the granularity of a sufficient to understand the performance of the network at the
single broadband user. granularity of a single broadband user.
Another approach involves implementing the measurement capability as Another type of probe involves implementing the measurement
a webpage or an "app" that end users are encouraged to download onto capability as a webpage or an "app" that end users are encouraged to
their mobile phone or computing device. Measurements are triggered by download onto their mobile phone or computing device. Measurements
the end user, for example the user interface may have a button to are triggered by the end user, for example the user interface may
"test my broadband now". One advantage of this approach is that the have a button to "test my broadband now". One advantage of this
performance is measured to the end user, rather than to the home approach is that the performance is measured to the end user, rather
gateway, and so includes the home network. Another difference is that than to the home gateway, and so includes the home network. Another
the system is much more loosely controlled, as the panel of end users difference is that the system is much more loosely controlled, as the
and the schedule of tests are determined by the end users themselves panel of end users and the schedule of tests are determined by the
rather than the measurement system. It would be easier to get large- end users themselves rather than the measurement system. It would be
scale, however it is harder to get comparable benchmarks as the easier to get large-scale, however it is harder to get comparable
measurements are affected by the home network and also the population benchmarks as the measurements are affected by the home network and
is self-selecting and so potentially biased towards those who think also the population is self-selecting and so potentially biased
they have a problem. This could be alleviated by stimulating towards those who think they have a problem. This could be alleviated
widespread downloading of the app and careful post-processing of the by stimulating widespread downloading of the app and careful post-
results to reduce biases. processing of the results to reduce biases.
There are several other possibilities. For example, as a variant on There are several other possibilities. For example, as a variant on
the first approach, the measurement capability could be implemented the first approach, the measurement capability could be implemented
as software embedded in the home gateway, which would make it more as software embedded in the home gateway, which would make it more
viable to have the capability on every user line. As a variant on the viable to have the capability on every user line. As a variant on the
second approach, the end user could initiate measurements in response second approach, the end user could initiate measurements in response
to a request from the measurement system. to a request from the measurement system.
The operator of the measurement system should be careful to ensure The operator of the measurement system should be careful to ensure
that measurements do not detrimentally impact users. Potential issues that measurements do not detrimentally impact users. Potential issues
skipping to change at page 14, line 13 skipping to change at page 13, line 12
scope of LMAP, as is the key challenge of how to integrate the scope of LMAP, as is the key challenge of how to integrate the
measurement system into a network operator's existing tools for measurement system into a network operator's existing tools for
diagnostics and network planning. diagnostics and network planning.
Finally the test data, along with any associated network, product or Finally the test data, along with any associated network, product or
subscriber contract data is commercial or private information and subscriber contract data is commercial or private information and
needs to be protected. needs to be protected.
7 Security Considerations 7 Security Considerations
Large-scale measurements raise several potential security, privacy Large-scale measurements raise several potential security, privacy
(data protection) and business sensitivity issues. Both the network (data protection) [RFC6973] and business sensitivity issues.
operator and regulator use cases potentially raise the following
issues:
1. a malicious party that gains control of Measurement Agents to 1. a malicious party may try to gain control of probes to launch
launch DoS attacks at a target, or to alter (perhaps subtly) DoS (Denial of Service) attacks at a target. A DoS attack could be
Measurement Tasks in order to compromise the end user's privacy, targeted at a particular end user or set of end users, a certain
the business confidentiality of the network, or the accuracy of network, or a specific service provider.
the measurement system.
2. a malicious party that gains control of Measurement Agents to 2. a malicious party may try to gain control of probes to create a
create a platform for pervasive monitoring [RFC7258], in order to platform for pervasive monitoring [RFC7258], or for more targeted
attack the privacy of Internet users and organisations. monitoring. [RFC7258] summarises the threats as: "an attack may
change the content of the communication, record the content or
external characteristics of the communication, or through
correlation with other communication events, reveal information
the parties did not intend to be revealed." For example, a
malicious party could distribute to the probes a new measurement
test that recorded (and later reported) information of maleficent
interest. Similar concerns also arise if the measurement results
are intercepted or corrupted.
3. a malicious party that intercepts or corrupts the Measurement * from the end user's perspective, the concerns include a
Results &/or other information about the Subscriber, for similar malicious party monitoring the traffic they send and receive,
nefarious purposes. who they communicate with and the websites they visit, and
information about their behaviour such as when they are at home
and the location of their devices. Some of the concerns may be
greater when the MA is on the end user's device rather than on
their home gateway.
4. a malicious party that uses fingerprinting techniques to * from the network operator's perspective, the concerns include
identify individual end users, even from anonymized data the leakage of commercially-sensitive information about the
design and operation of their network, their customers and
suppliers. Some threats are indirect, for example the attacker
could reconnoitre potential weaknesses, such as open ports and
paths through the network, which enabled it to launch an attack
later.
5. a measurement system that does not obtain the end user's * from the regulator's perspective, the concerns include
distortion of the measurement tests or alteration of the
measurement results. Also, a malicious network operator could
try to identify the broadband lines that the regulator was
measuring and prioritise that traffic ("game the system").
3. a measurement system that does not obtain the end user's
informed consent, or fails to specify a specific purpose in the informed consent, or fails to specify a specific purpose in the
consent, or uses the collected information for secondary uses consent, or uses the collected information for secondary uses
beyond those specified. beyond those specified.
6. a measurement system that is vague about who is responsible for 4. a measurement system that does not indicate who is responsible
privacy (data protection); this role is often termed the "data for the collection and processing of personal data and who is
controller". responsible for fulfilling the rights of users. The responsible
party (often termed the "data controller") should, as good
In addition, the regulator use case has the following potential practice, consider issues such as defining:- the purpose for which
issue: the data is collected and used; how the data is stored, accessed,
and processed; how long it is retained for; and how the end user
7. a malicious network operator could try to identify the can view, update, and even delete their personal data. If
broadband lines that the regulator was measuring and prioritise anonymized personal data is shared with a third party, the data
that traffic ("game the system"). controller should consider the possibility that the third party
can de-anonymize it by combining it with other information.
The [framework] also considers some potential mitigations of these These security and privacy issues will need to be considered
issues. They will need to be considered by an LMAP protocol and more carefully by any measurement system. In the context of LMAP, the
generally by any measurement system. [framework] considers them further along with some potential
mitigations. Other LMAP documents will specify protocol(s) that
enable the measurement system to instruct a probe about what
measurements to make and that enable the probe to report the
measurement results. Those documents will need to discuss solutions
to the security and privacy issues. However, the protocol documents
will not consider the actual usage of the measurement information;
many use cases can be envisaged and, earlier in this document, we
have described some likely ones for the network operator and
regulator.
8 IANA Considerations 8 IANA Considerations
None None
Contributors Contributors
The information in this document is partially derived from text The information in this document is partially derived from text
written by the following contributors: written by the following contributors:
skipping to change at page 17, line 5 skipping to change at page 16, line 10
aFd0rv332RDReRfOYkJuagysstN3GZ__lQHTS8_UHJTWkrwyqIUjffVeDxQ/ aFd0rv332RDReRfOYkJuagysstN3GZ__lQHTS8_UHJTWkrwyqIUjffVeDxQ/
[Glasnost] M-Lab tool "Glasnost", http://mlab-live.appspot.com/tools/ [Glasnost] M-Lab tool "Glasnost", http://mlab-live.appspot.com/tools/
glasnost glasnost
[P.800] ITU-T, "SERIES P: TELEPHONE TRANSMISSION QUALITY Methods for [P.800] ITU-T, "SERIES P: TELEPHONE TRANSMISSION QUALITY Methods for
objective and subjective assessment of quality", objective and subjective assessment of quality",
https://www.itu.int/rec/dologin_pub.asp?lang=e&id=T-REC- https://www.itu.int/rec/dologin_pub.asp?lang=e&id=T-REC-
P.800-199608-I!!PDF-E&type=items P.800-199608-I!!PDF-E&type=items
[MOS] Wikipedia, "Mean Opinion Score",
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mean_opinion_score
[DAE] Digital Agenda for Europe, COM(2010)245 final, Communication
from the Commission to the European Parliament, the
Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and
the Committee of the Regions, http://eur-
lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52010DC0245&from=EN
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Marc Linsner Marc Linsner
Cisco Systems, Inc. Cisco Systems, Inc.
Marco Island, FL Marco Island, FL
USA USA
EMail: mlinsner@cisco.com EMail: mlinsner@cisco.com
Philip Eardley Philip Eardley
skipping to change at page 17, line 31 skipping to change at page 17, line 31
Trevor Burbridge Trevor Burbridge
BT BT
B54 Room 77, Adastral Park, Martlesham B54 Room 77, Adastral Park, Martlesham
Ipswich, IP5 3RE Ipswich, IP5 3RE
UK UK
Email: trevor.burbridge@bt.com Email: trevor.burbridge@bt.com
Frode Sorensen Frode Sorensen
Norwegian Post and Telecommunications Authority (NPT) Norwegian Communications Authority (Nkom)
Lillesand Lillesand
Norway Norway
Email: frode.sorensen@npt.no Email: frode.sorensen@nkom.no
 End of changes. 43 change blocks. 
252 lines changed or deleted 242 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.42. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/