Mark Tinka wrote:
As you are seemingly requesting international legal formality, let me point out there are "International Telecommunication Regulations", based on which network neutrality is discussed by ITU.
And since when does the IETF world follow the ITU standards?
As copper and optical fiber for access politically belongs to ITU, DSL and optical fiber standards of ITU are followed by the IETF world. I actually joined an ITU meeting at Geneva, when I was actively acting for DSL in Japan.
Even though ITU heads don't think much of IETF heads, you can't find an SDH or DWDM port in a laptop. On the other hand, GMPLS is based on OSPF, IS-IS and RSVP-TE :-).
FYI, IS-IS is part of OSI, which was jointly developed by ISO and ITU, not by IETF at all.
Well, I'll be asking my bank to sell me some IP Transit or DIA, then, since they are running an IP network.
Feel free to do so.
It may be, it may not be. The reason is only one or a small handful of folk are investing US$700 million into a submarine cable.
Are you agreeing with me that they are earning a lot more than they should?
On the other hand, access networks are built by several operators, all competing.
Access networks are subject to regional monopoly unless unbundling is forced by regulatory bodies. Worse, with PON, such unbundling is hard (not impossible, see https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/5616389).
Willing buyer, willing seller. That's all that's needed. If the seller doesn't like the buyer, they move on. If the buyer doesn't like the seller, they move on.
So, you are a neo-liberalist. Good luck.
Are you saying that there is no such thing as tier 1 ISPs?
Hehe, let's not go down that rat hole.
But no, I don't believe in "tiers" for service provider networks. Haven't done so in nearly 15 years.
Though precise definition of "tier 1" is a rat hole, that there are entities called tier 1, which are the primary elements of the Internet backbone, is a common concept shared by most of us, maybe excluding you. Masataka Ohta