Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ktisis.cut.ac.cy/handle/10488/7169
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorGyarmati, Laszlo-
dc.contributor.authorStanojevic, Rade-
dc.contributor.authorSirivianos, Michael-
dc.contributor.otherΣιριβιανός, Μιχάλης-
dc.date.accessioned2013-02-18T13:03:39Zen
dc.date.accessioned2013-05-17T10:38:33Z-
dc.date.accessioned2015-12-09T12:04:15Z-
dc.date.available2013-02-18T13:03:39Zen
dc.date.available2013-05-17T10:38:33Z-
dc.date.available2015-12-09T12:04:15Z-
dc.date.issued2012-
dc.identifier.citationIMC '12 Proceedings of the 2012 Internet Measurement Conference, Boston, Massachusetts, USA, November 14- 16, 2012, pp. 509-522en_US
dc.identifier.isbn978-1-4503-1705-4-
dc.identifier.urihttp://ktisis.cut.ac.cy/handle/10488/7169-
dc.description.abstractWe study the problem of how to share the cost of a backbone network among its customers. A variety of empirical cost-sharing policies are used in practice by backbone network operators but very little ever reaches the research literature about their properties. Motivated by this, we present a systematic study of such policies focusing on the discrepancies between their cost allocations. We aim at quantifying how the selection of a particular policy biases an operator's understanding of cost generation. We identify F-discrepancies due to the specific function used to map traffic into cost (e.g., volume vs. peak rate vs. 95-percentile) and M-discrepancies, which have to do with where traffic is metered (per device vs. ingress metering). We also identify L-discrepancies relating to the liability of individual customers for triggered upgrades and consequent costs (full vs. proportional), and finally, TCO-discrepancies emanating from the fact that the cost of carrying a bit is not uniform across the network (old vs. new equipment, high vs. low energy or real estate costs, etc.). Using extensive traffic, routing, and cost data from a tier-1 network we show that F-discrepancies are large when looking at individual links but cancel out when considering network-wide cost-sharing. Metering at ingress points is convenient but leads to large M-discrepancies, while TCO-discrepancies are huge. Finally, L-discrepancies are intriguing and esoteric but understanding them is central to determining the cost a customer inflicts on the networken_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherACMen
dc.rights© ACM 2012en_US
dc.subjectFairnessen_US
dc.subjectCost allocationen_US
dc.subjectInterneten_US
dc.subjectReal propertyen_US
dc.titleSharing the cost of backbone networks: cui bono?en_US
dc.typeBook Chapteren_US
dc.collaborationCyprus University of Technologyen_US
dc.collaborationTerveystalo Turkuen_US
dc.subject.categoryComputer and Information Sciencesen_US
dc.reviewpeer reviewed-
dc.countrySpainen_US
dc.countryCyprusen_US
dc.subject.fieldEngineering and Technologyen_US
dc.relation.conferenceACM SIGCOMM Internet Measurement Conferenceen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1145/2398776.2398830en_US
dc.dept.handle123456789/134en
cut.common.academicyear2012-2013en_US
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
item.languageiso639-1other-
crisitem.author.deptDepartment of Electrical Engineering, Computer Engineering and Informatics-
crisitem.author.facultyFaculty of Engineering and Technology-
crisitem.author.orcid0000-0002-6500-581X-
crisitem.author.parentorgFaculty of Engineering and Technology-
Appears in Collections:Κεφάλαια βιβλίων/Book chapters
Show simple item record

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

7
checked on Mar 1, 2019

Page view(s)

69
Last Week
0
Last month
2
checked on Sep 19, 2019

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.