On 7/25/14, 9:29 AM, John C Klensin wrote: > Steve, > > I completely agree with your comment and suggestions (including > at least knowing hotel network capabilities in advance of > arrival), but note that at least some of the reason while the > hotel networks perform so badly under IETF meeting load is that > many of them are seriously underprovisioned at multiple points. > If the meetings team were to perform simple tests (that we > helped design) based on the number of people in that team, they > would be likely to get good information about capability > limitations (e.g., ports and options) but would be unlikely to > get sufficient information about performance under serious load. > Clearly, we could figure out how to run a load test, but I > assume it would take a lot of cooperation from the hotel (or > several hundred of us occupying rooms). so, We've taken the hotel's captive portal / nat platform /internet service out of the path for the residential network for the week. We do this where possible, and in cases where we cannot this is typically noted. While wifi coverage, lre/dsl and internal topology are out of our control, the hotel network is being served by the the IETF network and has no restrictions respecting authentication, ports available, middleboxes and so forth. There is nothing especially interesting to report there. > best, > john > > > --On Friday, 25 July, 2014 08:09 -0400 Steve Crocker > <steve@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> If we're going to discuss hotel networks, encryption of the >> channel is nice to have but there are more serious problems. >> >> o Many hotel networks restrict the ports that can be reached. >> This results in an absolute failure for some of us. >> >> o Many hotel networks do not support the full range of options >> for DNSSEC. >> >> o Many hotel networks have very poor bandwidth and become >> overloaded when the IETF comes to town. >> >> The meetings team does an excellent job of planning and >> running the meetings. They do extensive investigation of each >> proposed meeting site and they do a stellar job setting up and >> running the networks at each meeting. I wish they would also >> test the hotel networks in advance and report to all of us the >> limitations we're likely to encounter. And, of course, it >> would be pretty easy for a volunteer group of IETFers to >> organize a reporting effort too. > > > >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature