It makes the thread very hard to follow.
Why not?
Please don't top post!
From: Justin Horstman <justin.horstman@gorillanation.com> Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2010 11:54:12 -0700
That link is silly, and completely opposite to what they said....
-----Original Message----- From: Harry Hoffman [mailto:hhoffman@ip-solutions.net] Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 11:00 AM To: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Google wants your Internet to be faster
Heh, well is seems like one of the PIRGs is joining the fray, at least in PA:
The NY Times article has little to nothing to do with reality and it was bad of PennPIRG to cite that bit of twaddle. That said, the actual, published document has some huge issues. It pays excellent lip service to net neutrality, but it has simply HUGE loopholes with lots of weasel words that could be used to get away with most anything. for example, it expressly excludes and wireless network. It is being widely interpreted as being anti-network neutrality. Whether Google intended this is unclear. I suspect Verizon wanted exactly what it got. -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) E-mail: oberman@es.net Phone: +1 510 486-8634 Key fingerprint:059B 2DDF 031C 9BA3 14A4 EADA 927D EBB3 987B 3751