[governance] What is Network Neutrality

[Ralf Bendrath]

Parminder schrieb:
> 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?"
Very much so.

But:

> I have neither a technical background, nor much interest in technical
> issues, and am myself looking it from a political and advocacy angle,
I am afraid we can't distinguish these two. This is a clear example of
geeky technicalities making huge differences in political terms and vice
versa.

> In this context, I am really bothered whether NN would get understood as
> how Obama himself put it
> 
> ""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...
This angle is pretty much over as far as I can see (except for the fact
that Fox of course can rent a faster server and uplink than mom and pop,
but this is beyond discussion). The recent "Google breaking NN"
irritations stirred by the poor media coverage were about edge caching,
which has nothing to do with this.

As has been discussed here, the real NN debate and non-NN practices as far
as I can tell are now more about the ISPs as access providers for
end-users throttling or fast-tracking special content such as p2p or voip,
and of course about "filtering" etc. But again, there have always been QoS
protocols and related things, so it is all a bit more complicated.

> 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.
Lessig himself has the correct version:

<http://www.lessig.org/blog/2008/12/the_madeup_dramas_of_the_wall.html>
It is true, as the Journal reports, that I have stated that network
providers should be free to charge different rates for different service
-- "so long," the Journal quotes, "as the faster service at a higher price
is available to anyone willing to pay it."

-> See above, mom and pop vs. Fox, nothing new.

> It is my humble opinion that between these two positions lies a world of
> difference, 
There does not seem to be much difference between a misunderstood Obama
and the quoted Lessig. Read the Lessig post above for more.

> and the real battle will be situated in this space.
Well... no. ;-)

> 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.
...and understanding, one may want to add. ;-) SCNR

> 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.
It seems to me we need much more discussion amongst ourselves first.

But of course, a draft paper would help facilitate that, as Ginger has
suggested.

A good start by the way is Milton's paper from the GigaNet Symposium 2007
(not sure if it has been mentioned so far):
<http://www.internetgovernance.org/pdf/NetNeutralityGlobalPrinciple.pdf>

Best, Ralf
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance