But, I certainly mean that CDN operators should not request
peering directly to access/retail ISPs merely because they have
their own transit, because the transit is not at all neutral.

I'm still confused. 

Let's say I have a CDN network, with a datacenter somewhere, an edge site somewhere else. I carry my bits from my datacenter, across my internal network, to my edge site. This is where I intend to hand the bits over to someone else to carry them to the end user. 

Let's say in this site, I have a paid transit connection , and a peering session directly with the end user's ISP. Where is anything related to neutrality being 'violated', regardless of which path I choose to send the bits out? 

On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 10:36 AM Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> wrote:
Tom Beecher wrote:

>> For network neutrality, backbone providers *MUST* be neutral
>> for contents they carry.
>>
>> However, CDN providers having their own backbone are using
>> their backbone for contents they prefer, which is *NOT*
>> neutral at all.
>>
>> As such, access/retail providers may pay for peering with
>> neutral backbone providers for their customers but should
>> reject direct peering request from, actively behaving against
>> neutrality, CDN providers.

> If I am understanding you correctly, are you arguing that anyone with a
> network MUST be forced to become a transit provider for anyone else, in the
> name of "neutrality"?

No, not at all.

For example, CDN (N stands for a network) operators may rely on
neutral transit providers to connect their CDN to access/retail
providers.

But, I certainly mean that CDN operators should not request
peering directly to access/retail ISPs merely because they have
their own transit, because the transit is not at all neutral.

                                        Masataka Ohta