[ NNSquad ] Re: P2P resource taking (was Re: pcap files of the Comcast forgeries?)

[Brett Glass <nnsquad@brettglass.com>]

At 03:16 PM 12/20/2007, Craig A. Finseth wrote:
 
>In other words, it will force the problem to the surface instead of
>being "handled" behind the scenes.

Which is exactly what our end users do not want. They simply want the
Internet to "work." They tell us every single day that they don't want 
to have to know, think about, or understand what goes on behind the 
scenes. They hire us to take care of that. If we don't provide a
transparent experience, they'll go elsewhere.

>It also prevents ISPs from modifying the HTML being returned,

It'd prevent us from offering our ad blocking proxy, which is very 
popular among our users. 

>discriminating against competeing services, 

This is the only thing you've mentioned so far that actually has anything
to do with "network neutrality." However, encryption doesn't do this.
A cable company or telco seeking to disadvantage competitors could still
throttle by address.

>and a number of other issues.
>
>Keep in mind that no one on this list is saying that an ISP can't set
>any limits they want.  What _is_ being asked for is for the ISP to be
>up front about it: TELL people what the limits are.

We do.

>And encryption helps that goal.

No it doesn't. It forces the limits to be stricter and to impact users'
experiences much more. Want to pay double for the same speed? Or get
half the speed for the same money? Go ahead and encrypt.

--Brett Glass