On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 3:22 AM, Hank Nussbacher <hank@efes.iucc.ac.il> wrote:
http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2010/09/paid-prioritized-traffic
No, the founders anticipated source-declared priorities for unpaid military and government traffic. Commercial Internet really wasn't on their radar. On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 9:28 AM, Rodrick Brown <rodrick.brown@gmail.com> wrote:
Its unrealistic to believe payment for priority access isn't going to happen this model is used for many other outlets today I'm not sure why so many are against it when it comes to net access.
It's a question of double-billing. I've already paid you to send and receive packets on my behalf. Detuning my packets because a second party hasn't also paid you is cheating, maybe fraudulent. It'd be like the post office treating first class mail like bulk mail unless the recipient pays a first class mailbox fee in addition to the sender paying for first class delivery. On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 10:31 AM, Leo Bicknell <bicknell@ufp.org> wrote:
However, the proposed "remedies" of banning all filtering ever, or requiring free peering to everyone (taking both to the extreme, of course) don't match the operational real world. Many of those who are pushing for network neutrality are pushing for an ideal that the network simply cannot deliver, no matter what.
The network could deliver "cost-reimbursable" peering, in which any service provider above a particular size is by regulation compelled to provide peering at the cost of the basic connection in at least one location in each state in which they operate Internet infrastructure. As a matter of simple fairness, someone else has already paid them to move the packets. Why should you have to pay them more than the cost of the port? A small number of transit-frees would resent it, but it would damage them only in that it levels the playing field for small businesses, enhancing the small businesses' capabilities without enhancing their own.
Rather than network neutrality, I'd simply like to see truth in advertising applied.
Now you're talking about something that truly can't happen. You can't sell a service that, on paper, delivers less than the other guy's. Advertising is a constant race to the bottom because that's the behavior consumers reward. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William D. Herrin ................ herrin@dirtside.com bill@herrin.us 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004