[157145] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Typical additional latency for CGN?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Sun Oct 7 20:46:01 2012
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAD6AjGR9QV8MmB8yC4h29adBMOMj2j5dU-LiyT+PQWf_+7mjeA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Oct 2012 17:42:11 -0700
To: Cameron Byrne <cb.list6@gmail.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Oct 7, 2012, at 3:18 PM, Cameron Byrne <cb.list6@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 7, 2012 1:48 PM, "Tom Limoncelli" <tal@whatexit.org> wrote:
>>
>> Have there been studies on how much latency CGN adds to a typical
>> internet user? I'd also be interested in anecdotes.
>>
>
> Anecdote. Sub-millasecond, with full load. (gigs and gigs) . CGN does not
> meaningfully add latency. CGN is not enough of a factor to impact happy
> eyeballs in a way that improves ipv6 use.
>
>> I've seen theoretical predictions but by now we should have
>> measurements from early-world deployments.
>>
>
> Most mobile providers have been doing what is commonly called cgn for 5 to
> 10 years. CGN is not a new concept or implementation for mobile.
>
True, but, as we have discussed before, mobile users, especially in the US,
have dramatically lowered expectations of internet access from their mobile
devices vs. what they expect from a household ISP.
We expect half the services we want to be crippled by mobile carriers because
they don't like competition. We file lawsuits when that happens on our
terrestrial connections.
Owen
