[ NNSquad ] Re: Comments on NNSquad Purpose

[Phil Karn <karn@ka9q.net>]

Bob Frankston wrote:
> We need to distinguish between measure like bandwidth and latency over the
> complete path vs within a single carriers' facilities. An extreme example is
> getting under a megabit per second (which, at one time was pretty good)
> between my 50Mbps connection in the US and a site in Hong Kong that might
> advertise an even higher speed.
>

I don't think so. You're talking about generic network performance measurements,
and that's not what we're here for. There are rarely any guarantees on
end-to-end Internet performance except in special cases, and even then only when
the whole path is under one entity's control (e.g., some dedicated VoIP backbones).

>From a neutrality standpoint, we care only how that performance might depend on
the contents of my packets, or when the source and destination addresses change
but the route does not change (or should not change - this can get tricky).

By analogy, First Amendment case law says that while a city can require a permit
for a public march, it cannot discriminate on the basis of the marchers'
message. Even highly offensive marchers (e.g., American Nazi Party, as seen in
the first Blues Brothers movie) have equal access to the streets.

The city isn't required to widen the streets if they're too narrow to
accommodate all the marchers. But whatever streets it does have must be made
available on equal terms to everybody regardless of their message.

That's exactly the kind of network neutrality with respect to content that I'm
talking about here.