This report gives an overview of the first three SESERV focus groups held during the SESERV Athens Workshop. Focus group participation was voluntary, and selection of who should attend was quasi arbitrary; the discussion was seeded in each case with one or two presentations by relevant Challenge 1 projects, who would be demonstrating potential solutions to a number of tussle and tussle-types. The goal of the focus groups, therefore, was to discuss the issues raised by the proposed solution(s), in particular to explore other tussles which may develop as a consequence of a multi-stakeholder consideration of those solutions. As such, the focus groups would potentially provide some form of demonstration of the tussle methodology developed and defined by the SESERV project. The focus groups demonstrate that the SESERV tussle analysis methodology can and does identify appropriate issues (tussles) which the appropriate stakeholders can use as the basis for agreement or at least for constructive design discussions.
Below, you can find a summary of the 3 focus groups. For more information on a particular focus group discussion, please visit the related page:
|
Focus Group
| Participants |
Preliminary findings
| Outcome
| |
User-centricity
and transparency with an emphasis on wireless networks
| 11 | - Users may
need trust-enabling technologies and economic incentives for relaying traffic
- ISPs may be
concerned about losing control of their networks but they could be willing to
release that control, if it would increase user satisfaction
| - Users may
need trust-enabling technologies and economic incentives for relaying traffic
- ISPs may be
concerned about losing control of their networks but they could be willing to
release that control, if it would increase user satisfaction
| | Content and service
delivery architectures, with an emphasis on information-centric technologies
| 14 |
- ISPs lower their transit costs
and gain a larger share of the content delivery market with deploying ICN
architectures and their own CDNs
- Traditional stakeholders whose
interest are offended will respond e.g. transit ISPs will evolve and enter the
content delivery market (interconnect “islands of information")
| - Main tussle: contention between CDNs and carrier networks
- Location and management of
content caches significant
- Role of name resolution services is key
-
Lack of motivation to
engage and change from the carrier networks
| | Interconnection agreements
and monitoring, with an emphasis on technologies promoting collaboration
between ISPs for QoS-aware service provision
| 12 |
- Smaller ISPs are likely to
retreat from the market, or collaborate with other small ISPs to increase their
control during QoS path setup
- End users will probably
demand some kind of SLA monitoring tool that allows to make sure that the
premium rates they have asked and payed
for are provided
|
- Edge ISPs felt disenfranchised: they felt they were losing
control over their own business
- Market shift for NEM’s (Network Equipment Manufacturers): now
supplying different customers and no longer constrained by regulators
- Significance of Social
Network Sites in “controlling” what the carrier networks do and how they
perform
|
|
|
