Paper detail

From ATM to MPLS and QCI: The Evolution of Differentiated QoS Standards and Implications for 5G Network Slicing

The networking community continues to create new technologies and update existing ones to improve the quality, reliability, and "tailorability" of data networks. However, whenever Internet service providers attempt to productize "tailorability" and sell it explicitly to end customers as a premium service over best effort connectivity, they either fail to overcome net neutrality concerns or struggle to gain market traction. For this article, we focus only on those networking protocols, technologies, or standards whose goal is to offer tailored connectivity to paying customers on a public network and refer to them as differentiated QoS (D-QoS) standards. This article makes two contributions. First, it explores the techno-economic market trajectory of D-QoS standards to understand the factors that determine success. In doing this, we acknowledge that while there is wide variation and dissimilarity in their underlying technical properties, the expectation and goal for all D-QoS standards is that they will be used to provide guaranteed connection for which customers could be prepared to pay. As such, we consider Layer 2/3 technologies (e.g., ATM, frame relay, MPLS), signaling technologies (e.g., RSVP), data packet markers (e.g., IP ToS, DiffServ, WME, QCI), and end-to-end separation solutions (e.g., leased lines, network slicing) as a single cohort and analyze them together. Second, by exploring the parallels with 5G network slicing, we argue that despite its inherent technical differences with other D-QoS standards, the commercial performance of network slicing may end up resembling that of previous D-QoS standards. Consequently, we seek to learn lessons from previous D-QoS attempts and suggest that enterprise-focused 5G slices, running within a single service provider's domain and with binding service level agreements, will have the highest chance of success in the short/medium term.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.