NNSquad - Network Neutrality Squad

NNSquad Home Page

NNSquad Mailing List Information


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[ NNSquad ] Re: Comments on NNSquad Purpose


> From: Brett Glass [mailto:brett@lariat.net] 
> This sounds like the beginning of a definition, but it's far 
> too vague. Customers don't want to know every detail of how 
> the Internet works, so every "behavior not specifically 
> requested" is not undesirable.

Put simply, I want and expect Internet access with as few exceptions as
possible.  If my ISP does something unusual, such as blocking a specific
outbound port, placing a cap on usage, or prioritizes or degrades or blocks
a particular protocol, then those facts need to be published.  

I am interested in the technical details. For example, ISPs might want to
publish exceptions like Microsoft describes their security updates.  The
security update is first described in very general terms, with a link to an
additional page with technical details.  

Whatever an ISP does, its actions should be neutral to the expected
operation of the reset of the Internet.  In other words, Comcast's
degredation of P2P shouldn't be sending spurious and forged RSTs outside of
its own network.  

The internet has a history of taking care of matters without involving much
government interference.  If there is a law, all I want it to do is to make
the ISPs behave within the established or customary methods consistent with
the Internet community. If they want to do something new and different, they
need to publish their proposal for study and adoption.

I like the language in the 2005 FCC Policy Statement at
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-260435A1.pdf (url).
Let's do this.  As a ham radio operator, the FCC has a long history of
respecting the customary use of our medium, and even respects, upholds and
enforces the decisions of non-government bodies that have taken on the task
of carefully studying and coordinating how it is to be used.  Let's
encourage the FCC to treat the Internet in the same way.

Just like any other network that connects to the Internet, Comcast should
behave as a good Internet citizen, or it should be treated as rouge.  If it
doesn't stop, then its peers and customers should escalate their objections
in public forums, by erecting routing or blocking defences to the rouge's
objectionable behavior, and -- if necessary -- taking legal enforcement
action available within the proper jurisdiction of the rouge (if available)
and/or disconnecting the rouge from the Internet.  

These escalating objections are very effective in shaping public opinion
about a brand.  Brand image is very valuable.  VeriSign, for example, relies
on trust on its brand.  It lost a lot of trust in 2003 when it starting
redirection of misspelled DNS lookups to marketing pages (see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Site_Finder for a history).  I think we all can
agree that the value of its deteriorated during this time.