2. Multi-Service Internet Charging Bob Briscoe BT 24 Sep 1999 Pricing & QoS Workshop ENST, Paris

3. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar2 menu 4 market control of multiservice networks 4 cheap generalised packet charging systems 4 charging for quality 4 charging for multicast 4 the direction of value flow –stability of commercial models 4 results & limitations context demo & mobility related comments

4. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar3 context 4 multi-service, multicast, connectionless 4 can be flowless –simple  open 4 no PSTN billing to rely on 4 generalised technology allows many specific business models –future is …? computer-computer comms? –not just Web, audio & video 4 each idea independent context

5. diffchar requirements

6. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar5 too cheap to meter? 4 Qwest, Sprint - all you can eat –fat pipes, Terabit routers 4 Microsoft, Intel - eat all you can –fat software, GigaHertz processors, mass market 4 dilemma –single multiservice network reduces overheads –need empty queues for real-time multimedia –elastic data always fills queues req’mts

7. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar6 Why usage charging? 8 granularity mismatch –service: packet –charges: SLA / subscription / reservation 8 assumes low utilisation factor –gap between what is paid for and what is used req’mts 8 incentive for –customer to waste resources (e.g. robots) –provider to over-book resources 2001 50% extranet t utilisation

8. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar7 incentive to waste 8 computer-computer comms will dominate –near infinite capacity to waste resources –e.g. pre-fetching robots 8  access capacity >> core capacity 8  SLAs >> core capacity req’mts Capacity enhancement techniques

9. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar8 incentive to over-book (e.g. SLA)... h~5 r~5 #(AS)= r h ~ 3000... 2000 0? 400? 2000? 8 either broken guarantees 8 or 40,000 SLAs per packet 8 SLAs: guaranteed refunds  8 => usage charging req’mts

10. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar9 multi-application network utility 1/delay (1/latency) end-end e-mail Web, VoD conferencing, telephony gaming, agents req’mts

11. diffchar engineering

12. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar11 active tariff distribution to customers Internet multicast marketing or network mgmt tariff load engineer’g

13. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar12 self-billing - ‘pay and display’ 027 8 £ Internet customer premises or storage service data path engineer’g

14. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar13 self-billing - ‘traffic warden 027 8 £ Internet random sample customer premises engineer’g evidence

15. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar14 recursive - inter-provider charging Internet access provider Internet service provider corporate £ engineer’g

16. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar15 zero bits for charging transmission infrastructure charging infrastructure tariff for traffic class x? see channel y RSVP tariffs? see 224.1.2.3 bulk usage stats engineer’g

17. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar16 demo - tariff dissemination 4 multicast signed tariff class 4 modified class loader 4 listens for class arrival 4 stops current tariff object 4 loads new tariff object 4 2 13 engineer’g Mike Rizzo

18. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar17 demo - tariff dissemination engineer’g Mike Rizzo

19. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar18 admission control is a delusion 4 probability of session blocking with CAC = probability of packet block without CAC 4 control session admission  improve intra-session utility  reduce inter-session utility 4 just moving the problem 4 mechanism to allow user to choose

20. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar19 admission control at source a) traditional admission control service full! client full! b) price announcements service raise price client c) active tariff service The price algorithm client engineer’g

21. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar20 price & time offer various price fixing periods time price spot engineer’g

22. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar21 provider price control 4 congestion per region per class ¶re-route ·borrow ¸provision request ¹notify region’s price controller ºcontroller considers commercial implications »changes region’s price…... or routers become congested engineer’g

23. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar22 congestion avoidance pricing 4 if congestion unavoidable ¶router signals congestion ¶active tariff threatens receiver with price rise ·remote host feeds back to sender ¸sender backs off, unless: remote host offers to accept raised price......and sender agrees engineer’g

24. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar23 Self-billing. Business decisions Dynamic Pricing Establish/review pricing strategy ProviderCustomer Tariffing info frequent price variation multiple tariff bands (QoS, cust types) Want low communication overhead (esp in congestion situations) powerful processing capability can measure usage & congestion engineer’g

25. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar24 Tariff Representation –not flexible –pricing changes require explicit communication by provider Passive Active –tunable algorithm that can vary price on basis of local monitoring –lower communication overheads –but more security problems engineer’g

26. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar25 User interfacing + Tariff bundle Client devices only need to load in memory the currently active tariffs. Other tariffs can be stored elsewhere. = Algorithm GUI Definition (XML) Client Device builds a specific GUI engineer’g

27. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar26 Transport For small number of large customers with different requirements - e.g. back-bone provider to ISP - connection-oriented protocol Unicast Multicast For large number of small customers with similar requirements - e.g. edge ISP to dial-up customers - soft-state announcement protocol engineer’g

28. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar27 Example tariff algorithm public class CngSensitiveLinear implements PacketCountTariff { private CngSensitiveLinearDisplay display;... public float getPrice(int pkin, int pkout, int cng) { boolean cngWarning = false; float price = pkin*inRate + pkout*outRate; if (cng > cngThreshold) { // congestion threshold exceeded if (pkin > inLimit || pkout > outLimit) { // traffic limits exceeded price += cngPenalty; cngWarning = true; } display.update(pkin, pkout, cng, cngWarning); return price; } … engineer’g

29. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar28 + engaged tone if cost too high traditional access control by price Internet access provider Internet service provider engineer’g

30. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar29 optimistic access control service ? customer 1 2 ? 4 single blocking test engineer’g

31. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar30 customer state in the network police classify schedule 2 1 3 engineer’g

32. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar31 self-policing police 1 price classify schedule 2 3 best effort engineer’g

33. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar32 diffserv SLA without policing 4 tariff based on SLA –multicast + unicast specifics 4 customer marks traffic in/out as per diffserv 4 customer measures traffic & reports 4 provider audits measurements 4 if incorrect marking, fine or cut off engineer’g

34. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar33 demo: price controlled QoS Kostas Damianakis app QoS ctrl stack active tariff engineer’g non- functional

35. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar34 demo: accounting & payment Jérôme Tassel engineer’g

36. account sharing VP Act c Acs customerprovider Identity Payment PolicingRatingAccounting Measure- ment Ctrl Measure- ment Access ctrl I McMc MbMb MpMp Po network Pa c Po MC c service provision control reconcile control feedback payment host Po Act p Pa p Ra c Ra p

37. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar36 Accounting 4 Accounting on customer devices –Gather & Store network usage data –Apply tariffs to generate accounting records –Report to provider in aggregates –Provider control customer’s accounting 4 not enough resources –client’s alternative storage facility (PC) –network provider storage service –third party storage service Reporting in real-time Charging API

38. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar37 Billing 4 Can always relate usage to Customer through IP@ 4 Accounting data available locally is the bill No bill if micro-payments 4 User of a service needs not be the payee –BT Bill Direct, 0800, Advertisements –Can get very complicated relationships 4 Bill according to liability (defined in session description) View my Bill

39. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar38 Payment 4 Low risk if micro-payments 4 Integrate off-line payment with electronic payments 4 Integrate charge for service with charge for transport to create a single payment 4 Payments highest reporting level between customers and provider Current Work BT Bill Direct

40. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar39 Currency 4 Columbia Uni –vulnerability of market managed system limited to budget of attacker –network currency? –provider controls money supply –provider gives privileged access to high profile customers 4 Government Telephone Preference Service –currency = battery power

41. diffchar highlights - lowlights

42. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar41 limitations 4 full metering still to be integrated –meter rules sent with tariff? 4 reliability of end customer OS 4 user acceptance of dynamic pricing 4 user acceptance of dynamic provider code 4 hogging? summary

43. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar42 related project - M 3 I 4 Market-Managed Multi-service Internet 4 EC Vth Framework, Jan 2000 4 EU/US customer experiments 2001 4 partners: –BT, HP Labs, Telenor, Lyndewode –TU Darmstadt, Athens UEB, ETH Zürich –Berkeley INDEX, UCL summary

44. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar43 summary 4 market control of multiservice networks –hassle of dynamic pricing removed? 4 cheap generalised packet charging systems –changes assumptions? 4 charging for quality & multicast 4 session bundling summary

45. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar44 generalisations general pre-pay + credit pay as you go pay as you fancy raise price or fine spot + stability price usage-charging modular SDP bundling specific post-pay batch payment regular billing deny logical service stable price policing SLA or RESV retail bundling summary

46. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar45 further information 4 details  http://www.labs.bt.com/projects/mware/ but, may not appear for some time - see... http://www.labs.bt.com/projects/mware/ 4 Bob Briscoe  http://www.labs.bt.com/people/briscorj/ http://www.labs.bt.com/people/briscorj/ more info

47. diffchar business models

48. top level architecture CpCp VP c CcCc EpEp AM c Acs VP p customerprovider service provision EcEc 3 offer 1 control Identity Enterprise Contract App or M/w Service Valuation & payment Access ctrl SpSp I 6 control 8 feedback 7 reconcile 4 offer 2 control 5 accept

49. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar48 top level architecture! rudimentary interface no use alone customer provider models eg. unicast to customer of same provider

50. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar49 split-edge pricing - per direction NaNa NbNb NcNc NcNc NdNd NdNd NeNe W abr W bas W abs W bar 4 price in & out separately 4 each price between boundary and remote edge 4 price effects localised 4 rcvr accountable, but sender liable if disputed models

51. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar50 split edge pricing - per class 4 each class of service has a market 4 class mismatch effects localised models

52. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar51 split-edge pricing - per leg V QuQuQuQu QtQtQtQt QuQuQuQu QuQuQuQu QvQvQvQv QwQwQwQw QwQwQwQw NaNa NbNb NcNc NcNc NdNd NdNd NeNe W abr W bas W abs W bar 4 multicast & heterogeneous QoS models

53. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar52 service models the direction of value flow data flow

54. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar53 service flexibility - integration and separation or Xmission service $/unit Info service $/unit Info service Xmission service $/unit Xmission service $/unit Xmission service $/unit Info service $/unit or models

55. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar54 typical contractual chains service payment liability network provider listeners partici- pants partici- pants host agency conference network provider viewers service VoD network provider called party caller ‘phone models

56. service bundling CpCp VP c CcCc EpEp AM c Acs VP p reference EcEc Identity Enterprise Contract App or M/w Service Valuation & payment Access ctrl SpSp I CpCp VP c CcCc EpEp Acs VP p SpSp customerproviders

57. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar56 the direction of value flow 4 clearing grows comms market service money data flow models

58. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar57 clearing across edge providers iterative 3 7 46 44 100 51 44 service money 54 models

59. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar58 end to end pricing service price call pricing role models

60. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar59 clearing across edge providers third party 100 51 5 5 49 clearing 2 3 7 46 44 service money models

61. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar60 PIG - phone to Internet gateways service money Internet end-end PSTN iterative 1 3 21 24 21 100 41 5 5 59 2 3 7 36 29 25 clearing PIG models

62. contextreq’mtsengineer’gmodelssummary 24 Sep 1999diffchar61 exception peering 4 exceptional failures –loss of a packet subject to reservation –excess delay of a low latency packet 4 no customer revenue 4 no recriminations between ISPs –no “who lost packet?” –no “who delayed packet most?” 4 assume peers sufficiently dimensioned models