<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:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" 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)">
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Helvetica;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@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;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
span.EmailStyle17
{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:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</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 lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple style='word-wrap: break-word;
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space;-webkit-line-break: after-white-space'>
<div class=Section1>
<p>Good point but he is really missing what is net neutrality?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>Concern is level playing field for technology.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>Irrespective of technology (technology neutral), in India, there is cost for
license, one time spectrum fee and annual spectrum usage charges.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>Yes, if one doesn't pay any of these charges, it is convenient to sell at
the price quoted by Mr. Mehta and thus, one may not ask for Shahrukh's help.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>The paradox is that on one hand we advocate for the cheaper cost and on the
same hand, we are against Free propositions over Net Neutrality. :-)<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>Cheers<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>Amrita<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><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 0in 0in 0in'>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org
[mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Suresh
Ramasubramanian<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, May 19, 2015 6:49 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> governance@lists.igcaucus.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> [governance] Fwd: [india-gii] why strict Net neutrality works
best: simple beats complex<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>An interesting point of view - worth discussing for sure.<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>—srs<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>Begin forwarded message:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"'>From: </span></b><span
style='font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"'>Arun Mehta <<a
href="mailto:arun.mehta@gmail.com">arun.mehta@gmail.com</a>></span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"'>Subject:
[india-gii] why strict Net neutrality works best: simple beats complex</span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"'>Date: </span></b><span
style='font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"'>19 May 2015 6:41:51 am IST</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"'>To: </span></b><span
style='font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"'>"<a
href="mailto:india-gii@india-gii.org">india-gii@india-gii.org</a>" <<a
href="mailto:india-gii@india-gii.org">india-gii@india-gii.org</a>></span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>The IT industry has little respect for its veterans. Like
they say, if you don't learn from history, you are condemned to repeat it. A
brief history lesson, therefore. I presented this as an invited paper at the
Pune conference the ITU organized, called "Beyond the Internet"
about 5 years ago, let me know if you would like a copy.<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>The development of the Internet began roughly around the
same time that the telecom companies and the ITU began work on developing X.25
and X.400 standards and technology, analogous to TCP-IP and Internet email.
Even with the weight of the ITU and all the governments and telcos of the world
behind them, X.25 and X.400 have virtually disappeared, only surviving in
niches. Why? Because they were far more complex.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>Ethernet beat token ring and all its competitors, again,
because it was the simplest: A node that wants to transmit first listens, and
if there is nothing on the line, goes ahead and transmits. If two nodes both
decide to start transmitting at the same time and cause a collision, they wait
a random amount of time each, so as to be unlikely to collide again. WiFi did
spectacularly well as a wireless technology even with garbage spectrum, because
it essentially implements Ethernet in the air.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>Internet telephony beats conventional again because of
simplicity. If a conventional phone call costs you 100 Rupees, less than 1
Rupee is the actual cost of carrying the call.The cost of calculating how long
you spoke, from which to which number, at what time, on what plan, then sending
you the bill, fighting with you over the amount, sending goons to collect... is
of course at least an order of magnitude greater. And then, certainly not
least, is the cost of a Shahrukh Khan or equivalent to help sell it to you.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>Any violation of net neutrality adds to complexity. Once you
let the marketing guys call the shots, the complexity only grows. Any change
you implement involves changing the software, which becomes bloated and buggy.
This is why I believe that strict net neutrality will win.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>Arun Mehta<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal>_______________________________________________<br>
India-gii mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:India-gii@lists.india-gii.org">India-gii@lists.india-gii.org</a><br>
https://lists.india-gii.org/mailman/listinfo/india-gii<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>