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: Protocol transparency vs performance

I don't want to belabor the basic policy points except to note that the fundamental problem is in attempting to assign values to each bit. Any policy that can charge for the transmission of the bits runs into this problem. You canât value the bits out of context and thus must take an infrastructure approach.


We must be very careful about terms like âbroadbandâ which is used by policymakers for the carriersâ service delivery pipe and they get 99% of the capacity off the top. In fact, we shouldnât talk about âaccessâ because there is nothing being accessed. Itâs our local or First Square Mile connectivity that composites into an emergent whole.


âGovernment ownedâ is taken to mean the old natural monopoly and common carriage in the sense of railroads (http://www.frankston.com/?name=VONRailroad). This is why I talk about local ownership of the physical infrastructure. You want to avoid having the government â even the LoopCo â determine the value of the services so it can tariff the bits.


QoS â no need to belabor this except to note that by definition QoS is nonneutral and it must also be unnecessary because it creates no new capacity. Itâs in the nature of end-to-end that you have to discover what works and you canât empower a carrier to assure your favorite applications get favorable treatment.


Our measurement of non-neutrality is an intermediate step to highlight the consequences of current policies but we mustnât confuse preventing enumerated ways of meddling with assuring neutrality.