<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:x="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:excel" xmlns:p="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:powerpoint" xmlns:a="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:access" xmlns:dt="uuid:C2F41010-65B3-11d1-A29F-00AA00C14882" xmlns:s="uuid:BDC6E3F0-6DA3-11d1-A2A3-00AA00C14882" xmlns:rs="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:rowset" xmlns:z="#RowsetSchema" xmlns:b="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:publisher" xmlns:ss="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:spreadsheet" xmlns:c="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:component:spreadsheet" xmlns:odc="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:odc" xmlns:oa="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:activation" xmlns:html="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40" xmlns:q="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" xmlns:D="DAV:" xmlns:x2="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/excel/2003/xml" xmlns:ois="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/ois/" xmlns:dir="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/directory/" xmlns:ds="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#" xmlns:dsp="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/dsp" xmlns:udc="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" xmlns:sub="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/2002/1/alerts/" xmlns:ec="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmlenc#" xmlns:sp="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/" xmlns:sps="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:udcs="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc/soap" xmlns:udcxf="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc/xmlfile" xmlns:udcp2p="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc/parttopart" xmlns:wf="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/workflow/" xmlns:dsss="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2006/digsig-setup" xmlns:dssi="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2006/digsig" xmlns:mdssi="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/package/2006/digital-signature" xmlns:mver="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/markup-compatibility/2006" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns:mrels="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/package/2006/relationships" xmlns:spwp="http://microsoft.com/sharepoint/webpartpages" xmlns:ex12t="http://schemas.microsoft.com/exchange/services/2006/types" xmlns:ex12m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/exchange/services/2006/messages" xmlns:pptsl="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/SlideLibrary/" xmlns:spsl="http://microsoft.com/webservices/SharePointPortalServer/PublishedLinksService" xmlns:Z="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:" xmlns:st="" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Wingdings;
panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:Wingdings;
panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
color:black;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";
color:black;}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy;}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page Section1
{size:595.3pt 841.9pt;
margin:72.0pt 89.85pt 72.0pt 89.85pt;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:174002647;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:785700836 67698711 67698689 67698693 67698689 67698691 67698693 67698689 67698691 67698693;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-text:"%1\)";
mso-level-tab-stop:18.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
margin-left:18.0pt;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:63.5pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
margin-left:63.5pt;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l0:level3
{mso-level-tab-stop:108.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:144.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level5
{mso-level-tab-stop:180.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level6
{mso-level-tab-stop:216.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:252.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level8
{mso-level-tab-stop:288.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level9
{mso-level-tab-stop:324.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body bgcolor=white lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=blue>
<div class=Section1 dir=RTL>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Dear all<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>I’m just catching up on this interesting and important
conversation. Following on from Ginger’s comments, I was interested at the IGF
to see gathering momentum around the notion of building an internet governance
regime based on values and principles that are derived from human rights
standards. Hopefully the BoR coalition will move forward on this over the
course of the year. These discussions about net neutrality are very relevant,
and I agree about the need for a short, powerful statement that could then be
backed up by a longer argument/discussion.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>As I see it, there are a number of values that I think a range
of internet stakeholders would subscribe to. In the FoE project we’ve distilled
these down to:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>- Accessibility<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>-Diversity and pluralism<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>- Participatory and transparent governance<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>-Openness, creativity and innovativeness.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>To realise these values, we need policy principles. Discriminatory
access to content would clearly undermine a number of these values. The policy
principle that follows therefore might be: <i>“Networks should be ‘neutral’ in
the sense that the flow of content should not be subject to undue or arbitrary
discrimination for monetary, cultural or political reasons. Controls should
not be embedded in networks themselves”.<o:p></o:p></i></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>I’d be interested in any thoughts that you have on this approach
and wording. Obviously, worded this way, the principle is still very broad and
over arching, and the problem of what is meant by “arbitrary” and “undue” still
arises. But that problem is at least in part dealt with by reference back to
human rights standards and the values that derive from them. I wonder if the
next step would be to create some kind of directory of scenarios that would
explore what it would mean in practice for different stakeholders. Parminder’s
list might be the beginnings of that.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>In reference to whether we should be using the term “net
neutrality”, I think that it is messy and controversial. The concept of “neutral”
is also problematic, as arguing that policy should be rooted in values is in
tension with the idea that policy or technology should be neutral. However, I do
think it’s still useful as a signpost term, as people automatically know what
kinds of issues are being referred to.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>All the best,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Lisa<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm'>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";
color:windowtext'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:
"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext'> Ginger Paque [mailto:ginger@paque.net]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> 09 January 2009 09:58<br>
<b>To:</b> governance@lists.cpsr.org<br>
<b>Cc:</b> 'Ginger Paque'<br>
<b>Subject:</b> RV: [governance] What is Network Neutrality: revised<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'>This is a slightly revised version of the email I just sent, after
reading Parminder’s post to the BOR list. Changes are in all caps for ease of
reading.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'>Parminder says: (starting by quoting Ian)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'>“</span>So, the real task/ question is as you [Ian] put it ‘what
are the desirable network qualities that we are looking to protect or enhance?
Can we express them another way?’”<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR>“However, as argued earlier, at least provisionally,
I [Parminder] would not want to jettison the NN term and slogan, because it has
gathered some brand image and mass behind it, and I do think that most people
advocating NN do understand it as a socio-political issue and not a technical
issue.” (end quote)<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR>I think that our statement can support compliance
with a desired principle and end result that defines OUR concerns, adding a
parenthetical reference such as (sometimes/commonly included/known as in
definitions of NN). The same “brand image and mass behind” the term allow it to
be dismissed with allegations of “that’s not what NN means” if we are not
precise.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR>I think we have to define exactly what our concerns
are, address them in the statement, and then use the term NN if it helps
clarify our position. Can we do that in a concise, concrete manner? <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR>To be effective, we need to have a short, practical,
powerful statement. We could do this by outlining the importance of a [REMOVE:
rights] RESPONSIBILITY or PRINCIPLES-based framework with a specific reference
to support end-user choice and control -- MY view of NN <span
style='font-family:Wingdings'>J</span> -- and a practical emphasis for the next
IGF: greater voice and inclusion enhanced remote participation.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR>Thanks, everyone for moving the discussion forward.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'>Parminder says: (starting by quoting Ian)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'>“</span>So, the real task/ question is as you [Ian] put it ‘what
are the desirable network qualities that we are looking to protect or enhance?
Can we express them another way?’”<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR>“However, as argued earlier, at least provisionally,
I [Parminder] would not want to jettison the NN term and slogan, because it has
gathered some brand image and mass behind it, and I do think that most people
advocating NN do understand it as a socio-political issue and not a technical
issue.” (end quote)<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR>I think that our statement can support compliance
with a desired principle and end result that defines OUR concerns, adding a
parenthetical reference such as (sometimes/commonly included/known as in
definitions of NN). The same “brand image and mass behind” the term allow it to
be dismissed with allegations of “that’s not what NN means” if we are not
precise.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR>I think we have to define exactly what our concerns
are, address them in the statement, and then use the term NN if it helps
clarify our position. Can we do that in a concise, concrete manner? <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR>To be effective, we need to have a short, practical,
powerful statement. We could do this by outlining the importance of a
rights-based framework with a specific reference to support end-user choice and
control -- MY view of NN <span style='font-family:Wingdings'>J</span> --
and a practical emphasis for the next IGF: greater voice and inclusion enhanced
remote participation.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR>Thanks, everyone for moving the discussion forward.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div class=MsoNormal align=center dir=LTR style='text-align:center'><span
lang=ES style='color:windowtext'>
<hr size=2 width="100%" align=center>
</span></div>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><b><span lang=ES style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:
"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext'>De:</span></b><span lang=ES
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext'> Parminder
[mailto:parminder@itforchange.net] <br>
<b>Enviado el:</b> Viernes, 09 de Enero de 2009 01:30 a.m.<br>
<b>Para:</b> governance@lists.cpsr.org; Ian Peter<br>
<b>CC:</b> 'George Sadowsky'<br>
<b>Asunto:</b> Re: [governance] What is Network Neutrality</span><span lang=ES
style='color:windowtext'><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR>Ian<br>
<br>
I don't think any serious actor in the policy space takes NN (network
neutrality) as any kind of absolute technical architectural principle any
longer, because of the reasons you have laid out. So, the real task/ question
is as you put it "what are the desirable network qualities that we are
looking to protect or enhance? Can we express them another way?"<br>
<br>
However, as argued earlier, at least provisionally, I would not want to
jettison the NN term and slogan, because it has gathered some brand image and
mass behind it, and I do think that most people advocating NN do understand it
as a socio-political issue and not a technical issue. <br>
<br>
I have neither a technical background, nor much interest in technical issues,
and am myself looking it from a political and advocacy angle, which in my view
has taken up some amount of urgency. Obama administration is likely
to take up some legislative work on NN very soon - in the early
messiahnic zeal of a government voted on the pomise of some real change - and
however much I hate a single country determinine global political issues, what
gets decided in the Washington's corridors of power during this period may have
an irreversible impact on the future of the Internet. <br>
<br>
In this context, I am really bothered whether NN would get understood as how
Obama himself put it<br>
<br>
""What you've been seeing is some lobbying that says that the servers
and the various portals through which you're getting information over the
Internet should be able to be gatekeepers and to charge different rates to
different Web sites...so you could get much better quality from the Fox News
site and you'd be getting rotten service from the mom and pop sites," he
went on. "And that I think destroys one of the best things about the
Internet--which is that there is this incredible equality there." ( <a
href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9806707-7.html">http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9806707-7.html</a>
)<br>
<br>
or as Lawrence Lessig, who is tipped to become in some way or the other a close
adviser to Obama on this issue, sees it. Lessig says that charging content
providers differentially is ok by his definition of NN. <br>
<br>
It is my humble opinion that between these two positions lies a world of
difference, and the real battle will be situated in this space. I think the
Internet as we know - and as we cherish in its egalitarian qualities -
will be history if Lessig's version of NN is adopted by the new US
administration. This in my view is the point in NN debate and advocacy that
requires urgent attention. <br>
<br>
In this context it is especially important that the IGC makes all effort to see
that NN becomes a central issue on the IGF's agenda this year. <br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Ian Peter wrote: <o:p></o:p></p>
<pre dir=LTR>I hear the call that net neutrality needs to be an ongoing discussion with<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>IGF and we should include it in our submissions in February.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR>But I have the same trouble with net neutrality as I do with end to end.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>Both are being used as some sort of architectural principle that guarantees<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>the public good, when their inclusion in network architecture was more a<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>feature of the simple dumb network than some sort of intelligent design to<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>protect future generations of internet users from a range of abuses foreseen<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>decades ago. <o:p></o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>Both architectural principles are subject to distortions and the future<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>Internet will be neither fully end to end nor fully neutral. In fact, as<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>dogmatic network architectures they have already disappeared and it's of no<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>use to us to argue against internal corporate networks (a breach of end to<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>end)or traffic shaping (a breach of network neutrality) and all such. It's<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>not what it's all about.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>The purpose of both end to end and net neutrality discussions from our<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>perspective should be to guarantee that a future Internet possesses certain<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>qualities which have made the Internet the valuable facility it is. I think<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>we confuse these fundamental requirements by making them absolute<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>architectural principles that lead to these being discussed as carrier and<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>network management issues rather than user issues. <o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR>So to me the questions are - what are the desirable network qualities that<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>we are looking to protect or enhance? Can we express them another way?<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR>Some better language might help us to get better results. Governments will<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>tend to understand some basic principles, but when vague terms are thrown at<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>them such as end to end or network neutrality that have a range of meanings<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>there are more likely to just bow to commercial interests who can point out<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>in plain English to them their problems with the concepts.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR>So I think I am agreeing with Carlos and George, but trying to point out<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>there might be a problem in the way we are addressing the subject. But I<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>don't expect to win that one for a while yet.....<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>Ian Peter<o:p></o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR>PO Box 429<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>Bangalow NSW 2479<o:p></o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR>Australia<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>Tel (+614) 1966 7772 or (+612) 6687 0773<o:p></o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR><a
href="http://www.ianpeter.com">www.ianpeter.com</a><o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR> <o:p></o:p></pre>
<blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><pre dir=LTR>-----Original Message-----<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>From: George Sadowsky [<a href="mailto:george.sadowsky@attglobal.net">mailto:george.sadowsky@attglobal.net</a>]<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>Sent: 09 January 2009 02:02<o:p></o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR>To: <a
href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a>; Carlos Afonso; Parminder<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>Cc: McTim; Steve Anderson; Milton L Mueller; Michael Gurstein; Brian<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>Beaton; <a href="mailto:isolatedn@gmail.com">isolatedn@gmail.com</a><o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>Subject: Re: [governance] What is Network Neutrality<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR>All,<o:p></o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>I like very much Carlos' suggested approach of focusing on net<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>neutrality. In addition to addressing edge-content manipulation by<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>ISPs for whatever reason, it addresses the issue where (1) XXX is a<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>government, and packets in one or both directions may just end up in<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>the gulag (and sometimes with their senders and recipients, too!);<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>and (2) the potentially more beneficial case where SIPs are trying to<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>do spam control or other damage control of some kind. Note that this<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>would also diversion of traffic to alternate recipients, or simply<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>inspection of traffic in transit (e.g. the Great Chinese Firewall)<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR>There are, of course, different definitions of net neutrality, and<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>there are some thoughtful and challenging papers that address the<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>subject. It's probably worth at least establishing and contrasting<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>definitions, but more important, understanding what they imply for<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>users in areas such as privacy, confidentiality, and accuracy. I<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>agree with Carlos in that much of what I've seen does not concentrate<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>upon implications for the user.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>I have never seen from an ISP a clear statement by an ISP of what the<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>ISP does with respect to traffic manipulation (if anything), and I<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>would think that a reasonable goal should be to establish a framework<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>that allows/requires an ISP to declare, in simple language or<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>languages, its policies with respect to content manipulation and<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>delivery. This is most necessary and useful at the local level,<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>where there is one path to the user's computer. Although higher tier<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>ISPs have the capability to make the same declaration, it's not<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>useful to the user in that the routes traversed by packets are likely<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>to belong to multiple carriers and in theory may even vary, packet by<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>packet.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>This is a REAL Internet governance topic.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>Regards,<o:p></o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>George<o:p></o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>~<o:p></o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR>At 12:34 PM -0200 1/8/09, Carlos Afonso wrote:<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR> <o:p></o:p></pre>
<blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><pre dir=LTR>Regarding the growing drive for doing ever more complex analyses under<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>the "net neutrality" umbrella, I would recommend Sandvig's article<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>(unfortunately, the English version is available for a price at<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR><a
href="http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/mcb/272/2007/00000009/F0020002/art0">http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/mcb/272/2007/00000009/F0020002/art0</a><o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR> <o:p></o:p></pre></blockquote>
<pre dir=LTR>0012),<o:p></o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR> <o:p></o:p></pre>
<blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><pre dir=LTR>which we have just published in Portuguese in our magazine poliTICs<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>(<a href="http://www.politics.org.br">www.politics.org.br</a>). If you can manage Portuguese, please download the<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>PDF version under a CC licence from the site.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR>In reading the recent contributions (including Sandvig's), I feel most<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>if not all of them do not take the user approach to NN in consideration.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>I mean, I am sitting at a home in X city in Y state in Z country using<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>XXX ADSL operator and such and such things which seem to reveal packet<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>manipulation of some sort on the part of the XXX operator is happening.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>How do I deal with it, what are the legal/regulatory handles (or lack<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>thereof) I can use to protect myself against such manipulation, what<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>political involvement I should consider to change this (thinking of the<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>brainers who try and write action-oriented papers) and so on.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR>However, in any case and whatever the approach, I insist in considering<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>NN (whatever the name you wish to choose for it) a key topic for IGF.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR>frt rgds<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR>--c.a.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR> <o:p></o:p></pre></blockquote>
<pre dir=LTR>-----------------<<snip>>-----------------------<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR>--<o:p></o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>George Sadowsky <a
href="mailto:george.sadowsky@gmail.com">george.sadowsky@gmail.com</a><o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>2182 Birch Way <a
href="mailto:george.sadowsky@attglobal.net">george.sadowsky@attglobal.net</a><o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>Woodstock, VT 05091-8155 <a
href="http://www.georgesadowsky.org/">http://www.georgesadowsky.org/</a><o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>tel: +1.802.457.3370 GSM mobile: +1.202.415.1933<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>Voice mail & fax: +1.203.547.6020 Grand Central:<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>+1.202.370.7734<o:p></o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR>SKYPE: sadowsky<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>____________________________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR> <a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a><o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>To be removed from the list, send any message to:<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR> <a
href="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org">governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</a><o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR>For all list information and functions, see:<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR> <a
href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a><o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR> <o:p></o:p></pre></blockquote>
<pre dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR>____________________________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR> <a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a><o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR>To be removed from the list, send any message to:<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR> <a
href="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org">governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</a><o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR>For all list information and functions, see:<o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR> <a
href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a><o:p></o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre dir=LTR><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre
dir=LTR> <o:p></o:p></pre>
<p class=MsoNormal dir=LTR><span style='color:windowtext'><br>
<br>
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 3752 (20090108) __________<br>
<br>
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.<br>
<br>
<a href="http://www.eset.com">http://www.eset.com</a><br>
<br>
<br>
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 3753 (20090109) __________<br>
<br>
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.<br>
<br>
<a href="http://www.eset.com">http://www.eset.com</a><br>
<br>
<br>
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 3758 (20090112) __________<br>
<br>
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.<br>
<br>
<a href="http://www.eset.com">http://www.eset.com</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>