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: Moving the discussion onward ...

At 11:29 AM 11/12/2007, Jay Sulzberger wrote:
>And publication of our findings: I am for our use of Net structure
>discovery and measurement tools.  I am also for publication of
>results.  But such publicity cannot win the war, without a formal
>declaration of what is at stake.  See:

The manifesto at that page (or, actually, one click away from it) is, indeed, a declaration of war -- not only against small ISPs such as myself but also against innovation and against the consumers for whose benefit we are deploying better technology. It attempts to enforce a legal definition of "Internet access" which is in fact only one of the many ways in which Internet access can be provided. For example, among other things it prohibits:

* Network address translation (NAT), which is vital not only for our users' safety but to the economical operation of our network;

* QoS for VoIP and other quasi-real time applications;

* Policy routing;

* Traffic shaping;

* Anti-hogging mechanisms; and even

* Web page caching and acceleration.

What's worse, it is deceptive in that it claims that these arbitary requirements represent a "settled understanding" of the meaning of the term "Internet access," when in fact this is simply not true at all.

In the document, the author comes across almost like a spoiled child, wanting things his way and only his way. It's as if someone who liked only vanilla ice cream attempted to have a law passed which said that any ice cream of a different flavor could not be sold as "ice cream."

Sorry, but we sell many flavors, and they're all Internet access.

--Brett Glass, LARIAT.NET