[1st-mile-nm] FCC makes a move toward Net Neutrality

[peter]

Both sides of the comment have merit but I agree we should be worried 
about radical oversight by government trying to fix everything

TCP combined with IPV4, as routers get overloaded just divide traffic 
allowable by 50% and as we have seen Video and P2P are overloading many 
networks and yes the best example should be more and bigger networks but 
some kind of traffic management will always be needed even with smart 
upgrades to V6 and beyond

Again it stuns me that traffic management bad or good is being attempted 
without fully understanding all the implications involved and with 0 
input on dynamic modeling and mapping and huge dynamic input from ISPs 
and others

When I see legislation justification implemented by tons of paper 
documents on a subject like digital traffic in the real world its time 
to run for the hill

My hope for networks is really based on this analogy

" Engineers break complicated issues down into small pieces each of 
which is fixable, politicians do the reverse combining small problems  
to create huge un fixable issues. "

( : ( : pete

Peter Baston

*IDEAS*

/www.ideapete.com/ <http://www.ideapete.com/>


 

 



John Osmon wrote:
> [...from "Free Press" via Carroll Cagle...]
>  
>   
>> Your hard work is paying off! Just one hour ago, the Federal Communications
>> Commission voted to punish Comcast for violating Net Neutrality and blocking
>> your right to do what you want on the Internet.
>>     
>
> Ouch.  Too many of these types of victories could be devestating.
>
> I *want* my ISP to be able to block things.  I don't want spam.  I don't
> want the worm-du-jour running rampant.  I might even want to them block
> P2P so that they can keep their costs lower than other ISPs -- and thus
> offer me cheaper access.
>
> What we need is access neutrality -- from my home or office I want
> a multitude of choices when it comes to ISPs.  I want them to be
> unfettered by mandated "Net Neutrality" laws.  I want them to
> *offer* filtered access, but each ISP could specialize in some niche.
>
> Qwest has a great model for such a system -- their ATM-based DSL
> product.  Qwest offers connectivity from your home/business to 
> several ISPs.  Any number of service-based ISPs could be contemplated 
> by using such an access system.
>
> Perhaps an ISP alliance would crop up that partners with the MPAA/RIAA.
> Such ISPs would filter P2P traffic that isn't destined for "legitimate"
> services.  In exchange for such filtering, the MPAA/RIAA could subsidize
> the end-users' ISP fees with the savings from reduced piracy issues...  
>
> I believe that such a service would have many takers -- but would be 
> impossible to achieve if Net Neutrality becomes the law of the land.
>
> Free the copper/fiber -- the net will take care of itself.
>
> (Note:  I help run an ISP, so assume I have some biases...)
>
> As I get ready to send this, the following popped up on slashdot:
>   http://arstechnica.com/articles/culture/customer-owned-fiber.ars
> _______________________________________________
> 1st-mile-nm mailing list
> 1st-mile-nm at mailman.dcn.org
> http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/1st-mile-nm
>
>   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www2.dcn.org/pipermail/1st-mile-nm/attachments/20080802/4c69a1e7/attachment.html>