Can isps be profitable without violating network neutrality
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 16

Can ISPs be Profitable Without Violating Network Neutrality? PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 84 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Can ISPs be Profitable Without Violating Network Neutrality?. Amogh Dhamdhere Constantine Dovrolis Georgia Tech. Disclaimer. This is not a game theory talk. The Network Neutrality Debate. Recent Trend: Large amounts of video and peer-to-peer traffic on the Internet

Download Presentation

Can ISPs be Profitable Without Violating Network Neutrality?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Can isps be profitable without violating network neutrality

Can ISPs be Profitable Without Violating Network Neutrality?

Amogh Dhamdhere

Constantine Dovrolis

Georgia Tech


Disclaimer

Disclaimer

This is not a game theory talk

Amogh Dhamdhere

NetEcon 2008


The network neutrality debate

The Network Neutrality Debate

  • Recent Trend: Large amounts of video and peer-to-peer traffic on the Internet

  • Access Providers (AP) deliver content to users

    • Recent trend: Not profitable

    • Flat rates, commoditization of Internet access

  • Content providers (CP) generate the content

    • Profitable (think Google)

  • Tension between AP and CPs: “Network neutrality” debate

    • Traffic shaping/prioritization by ISPs

Amogh Dhamdhere

NetEcon 2008


A technical view

A Technical View

  • Previous work

    • Mostly non-technical

    • Emotional debates in the press, painting APs as villians

  • But what about the underlying problem: Non-profitability of Access Providers?

  • Our approach: A quantitative look at AP profitability

    • Investigate reasons for non-profitability

    • Evaluate strategies for the AP to increase profit

Amogh Dhamdhere

NetEcon 2008


Modeling ap profitability

Modeling AP Profitability

  • Three AS types: AP, CP and transit provider (TP)

    • Focus on the AP

  • AS links

    • customer-provider (customer pays provider)

    • peering (no payments)

  • AP and CPs can transfer traffic either through customer-provider or peering links

CP

CP

CP

CP

CP

CP

TP

CP

CP

AP

Amogh Dhamdhere

NetEcon 2008


Baseline model

Baseline model

  • AP and CP connect to the TP as customers

  • N users of AP, charged a flat rate R ($/month)

    • Flat rate prices decrease due to competition

  • Transit pricing: 95th percentile of traffic volume

    • 95th / mean = 2:1 for normal traffic, 4:1 for video1

    • More video means higher transit payment by AP

  • AP users: Heavy tailed distribution of content downloaded per month

    • High variability in AP costs

1Norton’06: Internet Video: The Next Wave of Massive Disruption to the U.S. Peering Ecosystem

Amogh Dhamdhere

NetEcon 2008


Ap strategies charging

AP Strategies – Charging

  • Charging strategies

    • AP charges “heavy hitters” according to volume downloaded

    • AP caps heavy hitters

    • AP charges CP (non-network neutral)

  • Charging strategies are disruptive

    • AP users may depart, depending on existing competition

    • Parameter d determines shape of departure probability curve

    • AP cannot control customer departure probability

Amogh Dhamdhere

NetEcon 2008


Ap strategy charging heavy hitters

AP Strategy – Charging Heavy Hitters

  • Threshold T to identify heavy downloaders

  • Charge “by volume” for heavy hitters

  • c(D) = D*R/T, where download amount D, threshold T, flat rate R

  • Customer departure probability depends on T and d

  • AP’s profit is sensitive to customer departure probability

  • For some values of d, no threshold gives larger profit than baseline !!

Amogh Dhamdhere

NetEcon 2008


Ap strategies connection

AP Strategies - Connection

  • Connection Strategies

    • AP caches content from CPs

    • AP peers selectively with CPs

  • Goal: Save transit costs paid to the transit provider

    • Does not increase the AP’s revenue

  • Non-disruptive

    • AP does not risk losing customers

Amogh Dhamdhere

NetEcon 2008


Ap strategy cache cp content

AP Strategy – Cache CP Content

  • AP caches content from some CPs locally

    • Saves transit costs, as content is served locally

    • Increases local costs incurred by the AP

  • Critical parameters: Fraction of content that can be cached (h) and cost incurred for caching (s)

    • Live content cannot be cached!

  • Profit is sensitive to h, s

Amogh Dhamdhere

NetEcon 2008


Ap strategies peering with cps

AP Strategies – Peering with CPs

  • Peering selectively with Content Providers can save transit costs, without risk of losing its users

  • But, peering is not free

    • Fixed, traffic dependent costs

  • Peering cost classes for CPs

    • “Low”: CPs at the same geographical location/IXP

    • “Medium”: CPs at nearby location/IXP

    • “Hard”: CPs in different continents

  • Cost benefit analysis: r = Estimated benefit/Estimated Cost

    • Peer if r > R

Amogh Dhamdhere

NetEcon 2008


Ap strategies peering with cps1

AP Strategies – Peering with CPs

  • Optimal point exists for the cost-benefit threshold R

    • AP controls the factor R

  • Significant reduction in AP costs with selective peering

  • Greater benefit with fewer CPs (more traffic from the largest CPs)

  • AP can leverage expansion by large CPs

Amogh Dhamdhere

NetEcon 2008


Conclusions

Conclusions

  • Network Neutrality research should also focus on the underlying problem: Non-profitability of ISPs

  • How can ISPs be profitable in spite of increasing traffic, heavy-hitter users and video traffic ?

  • Charging schemes that target heavy hitters may not work in the presence of competition in the AP market

    • Profit highly sensitive to customer departure probability

    • Out of the AP’s control

  • Connection strategies such as peering selectively with Content Providers seem promising

    • Completely under the AP’s control

Amogh Dhamdhere

NetEcon 2008


Thank you

Thank You !

Amogh Dhamdhere

NetEcon 2008


Ap strategy capping heavy hitters

AP Strategy – Capping Heavy Hitters

  • AP caps download rate for users

  • Limits the total amount of traffic handled

  • Saves transit costs and local costs, but does not increase revenue

  • AP profit depends on customer departure probability

  • For some values of d, no threshold gives larger profit than baseline !!

  • No significant improvement over baseline

Amogh Dhamdhere

NetEcon 2008


Ap strategy charging cps

AP Strategy – Charging CPs

  • AP directly charges the top sources of content (CPs)

  • Increases revenue, but violates “network neutrality”

  • Subject to customer departure due to discriminatory practices

  • AP profit depends on customer departure probability

Amogh Dhamdhere

NetEcon 2008


  • Login