Socioeconomic Tussles Analysis of the ETICS Approach for Providing QoS-enabled Inter-domain Services

© 2011 The SESERV Consortium 1

Socioeconomic Tussles Analysis of the ETICS Approach for Providing QoS-enabled Inter-domain Services

Costas Kalogiros, Costas Courcoubetis, George Stamoulis, Manos Dramitinos, Olivier Dugeon

FuNeMS, Berlin, Germany, July 4, 2012

SESERVSocio-Economic Services for European Research Projectshttp://www.seserv.org

European Seventh Framework CSA FP7-2010-ICT-258138


Understand stakeholders’

interests in current

ecosystem


interests in current

ecosystem

Identify policies in

current ecosystem


current ecosystem

Assess current

ecosystem

Assess current

ecosystem

Assess new ecosystem



interests in new ecosystem



Iteration A: technology set S

(existing technologies)

Iteration B: technology set S’

(S + new technology T)

Step 1: Identify all primary stakeholder roles and their characteristics for the functionality under investigation

Step 2: Identify tussles among identified stakeholders

Step 3: For each tussle assess the impact to each stakeholder and potential spillovers


new ecosystem


new ecosystem

Functionality I

itera

tion

due

to n

ew te

chno

logy

T o

r new

Functionality II






new ecosystem


new ecosystem



Iteration A: technology set S’’

(existing technologies + T)

Next

policies

Spillover to ‘Functionality II’ due to thein

trod

uctio

n of

a n

ew te

chno

logy

T o

r a n

ew

policy

A tussle analysis methodology


Collaborative Network Service composition between competing ISPs

ISP 2 ISP 1

ISP 3

Transit

Peering

Content Provider

Peering

Allowing the control of major parameters of interconnection is important for promoting collaboration that is mutually beneficial

What are the necessary business conditions for QoS-aware interconnection?

congestion!


Tussle evolution of service composition between competing ISPs

Functionality: Routing & Traffic Engineering

ISP-1 feels unfair

Traffic is optimized selfishly

Stable routing

ISP-2

ISP-2

Tuss

le o

utco

me

Stak

ehol

ders

’ st

rate

gies

/pol

icie

sSt

akeh

olde

rs’

stra

tegi

es/p

olic

ies

Tuss

le o

utco

me

Traffic is optimized selfishly

ISP-1

Iteration 2a:What if an ASQ good is used by ISP-2 to bypass the Best-Effort peering link for all traffic?

?

Iteration 2b:What if ISPs could control major properties of ASQ goods?

ISP-1

Iteration 3:What if ISP-1 stopped offering that ASQ?

Iteration 1:Support for best-effort connectivity only

ISP-2 feels unfair

ISPs perform traffic engineering for optimizing network usage

Functionality: Network Service composition

Introduction of ASQ goods make routing more stable and simpler

Unstable outcome

Stable outcome Evolves

AffectsLegend

Initial state

Functionality

?

time


Service delivery with assured quality between multiple ISPs

Functionality: SLA Monitoring

Source & Destination ISPs

contribute less to SLA penalties

Dest. ISP

Fairpenalties

Tuss

le o

utco

me

Stak

ehol

ders

’ st

rate

gies

/pol

icie

s

SourceISP

Iteration 3a:What if (sampled) monitored packets are known in advance ?

?

Transit ISPs contribute less to SLA penalties

Iteration 1:Introduction of inter-domain ASQ goods with no adequate monitoring of individual ISPs

Iteration 2:Destination ISP

under provisionsbackup ASQ goods

Transit ISP

?

Iteration 3b:What if Broker signals to all ISPs which packets to probe during service provisioning?

Broker

ISP-1

ISP-2

Customer

ISP-3

A

B C

DF

H

E

G

Content Provider

Router D suddenly fails!

router/probe

proxy

collector

ETICS Broker

X


Concluding remarks

• Internet technologies can have impact on:• stakeholders by triggering establishment of new

strategies / business models• other technologies (functionalities) by triggering

creation of new technologies

• “Tussles friendly” technologies allow for balanced control between stakeholders • Better incentives for adoption in the long-run• … but, requires significant effort from technology

designers for understanding the ecosystem


More Information

• http://www.seserv.org

• [email protected]

• http://www.linkedin.com/groups?about=&gid=3870856

• http://www.twitter.com/seserv

Stay tuned for latest SESERV WS results and upcoming deliverables on socioeconomic priorities for the Future Internet!


Thank you for your attention!


Support Slides


Internet Technology layer

Internet Socio-Economic layer

ISPsEnd-users ASPsRegulators

Socio-Economic layer is governed by laws of socio-economics, while technology layer by laws of physics

routerslinks switches

Internet protocols

Internet applications

Firewalls

middleboxes

3G towers

Out of network socio-economic transactions

Stakeholders with varying socio-economic interests

Technology choices(including investments, configurations)

Technology outputs (connectivity, QoS, mobility, security, etc.)

Technology components

…

servers

Internet as a platform for stakeholders’ interactions


Stakeholders’ strategies / policies with respect to a specific technology (functionality)

Adopt technology

Dimension resources

Configure technology

Use technology

ISP

Longer

Shorter

Adap

tatio

n tim

esca

le

• At each stage conflicts of interest (incentives) arise at the socio-economic layer.

• The combination of actors’ strategies lead to a tussle outcome, characterized by stakeholders benefits.

Internet Socio-Economic layer

tussle outcome

Basic Socio-economic Technology Cycle

Feed

back


Step 1: Identify all primary stakeholder roles and their characteristics for the functionality under investigation

Step 3: For each tussle assess the impact of a technology to each stakeholder and potential spillovers

Functionality I Functionality II

Step 2: Identify tussles among involved stakeholders

spillover new iteration

tussle tussle tussle tussle

A tussle analysis methodology


Comparison of system modeling approaches