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: FCC paths to Internet network management? (from IP)


The FCC should establish the rules necessary to take on the enforcement role
WRT adherence to established Internet Standards as defined by qualified and
recognized standards-setting bodies such as the IETF.  While these standards
do exist and have existed for a long time, these bodies have no enforcement
powers.  The rules were enforced through mutual agreement, and the process
is better reflective of an Internet built upon human-to-human handshake than
it is reflective of a corporate service provider agreement.  As a result,
the only "stick" to our "carrot-and-stick" system is trying to convince an
upstream provider or peer to discontinue peering with someone who is
nefariously violating the standards.  

This is not unlike how the FCC handles matters involving authoritative but
non-enforcement bodies in the areas of International Frequency Allocation
(WRT mode, power, content), Amateur Radio Repeater and Packet coordination,
and broadcast standards and practices.  

The FCC specifically should avoid taking on the role of setting such
standards, in that they would be unique and limiting only to the United
States.  Except, however, the FCC may be asked to apply imperfectly-matched
standards to resolve complaints which would set precedent.  For example, the
FCC may need to balance desires to provide -some- low-bandwidth Internet
Services by radio to currently unserved areas, even if it means allowing
that ISP to use technology limiting or prohibiting high-bandwidth
applications over such networks.  

As in the current case, when a question of reasonableness comes up, the FCC
should weigh the claim against both the written standards and its own common
judgment, perhaps after consultation with various experts willing to
testify.  This is not unlike the way it acts in questions of broadcast
decency. 

The above sounds like less of a technical solution than you might have liked
as a technologist, but I believe it is the best direction for the FCC to
take.

Robb Topolski


> -----Original Message-----
> From: nnsquad-bounces+robb=funchords.com@nnsquad.org [mailto:nnsquad-
> bounces+robb=funchords.com@nnsquad.org] On Behalf Of Lauren Weinstein
> Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 7:53 AM
> To: nnsquad@nnsquad.org
> Cc: lauren@vortex.com
> Subject: [ NNSquad ] FCC paths to Internet network management? (from IP)
> 
> 
> From: David Farber <dave@farber.net>
> To: "ip" <ip@v2.listbox.com>
> Subject: [IP] the FCC and Comcast  - a query from your editor
> Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 09:35:28 -0500
> 
> I have heard endless suggestions that the FCC stop what many consider
> improper network management practices by Comcast .. As a former Chief
> Technologist of the FCC I have some understanding of the level of
> technical competence and deapth at the FCC and some understanding of
> the process they and the companies they regulate go through to enforce
> regulations -- long and painful and often producing the opposite
> results intended.
> 
> So lets get down to details. What exactly do you want to FCC to do
> about network management. Details -- not just enforce NN -- that is a
> motherhood statement. Details and then  maybe the conversation can get
> meaningful.
> 
> -------------------------------------------
> Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
> RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
> Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com