[governance] [lack of] Net Neutrality for Mobile Internet in different shapes and forms?
Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro
salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com
Wed Mar 16 15:46:58 EDT 2011
(Thinking out loud)
For ISPs who have a diverse range of products, ie, different
bandwidths and resiliency and resulting product offerings where the
residential customer pays for x service and corporate customer who can
maybe afford fibre to the building pays y.
ISPs may argue that where a corporate customer pays for premium he gets premium.
My understanding of Network Neutrality was in the manner (rationale,
policy, commercial decisions) in which ISPs or operators translate it
into prioritisation of "packets".
Speed is a different issue, but wilful routing of packets based on
capacity to pay, is another issue. But where, an ISP is limited by the
Grade of Quality of means of transmission that it cannot be
accountable for, that is quite a different issue.
One of the challenges in developing countries where their ADSL has all
grades of copper quality (diminishing quality) where you have links
between old and new copper means that there is bound to be problems
with resiliency.
Depending on the governance strucutures in place within jurisdictions,
if some of those countries who are already struggling with constrained
resources refuse to give these operators "access deficit", it has a
direct impact on investments etc.
There are all kinds of inter-linkages and IG issues at play here.
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 7:07 AM, Roland Perry
<roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
> In message <AANLkTinDvjczk2sz7ifmwMXSXA0gvCNNObt38qrw48wF at mail.gmail.com>,
> at 14:51:13 on Wed, 16 Mar 2011, Ivar A. M. Hartmann
> <ivarhartmann at gmail.com> writes
>>
>> Roland,
>> if there are different definitions used by different groups of people,
>> wouldn't you want to use the definition Parminder referred to when
>> you're communicating with the audience in this list?
>
> Even if the UK authorities allow the ISPs to be non-Neutral, that's of
> little relevance to Parminder's issues because "neutrality" has a different
> context.
>
>> I don't believe we're all from the UK here, or are we?
>
> Nor are we all from Parminder's part of the world, with the issues he's
> concerned about.
>
> So I think we are in fierce agreement.
>
> Roland.
>
>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 13:02, Roland Perry
>> <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
>> In message <4D80B666.4070403 at itforchange.net>, at 18:38:54 on Wed,
>> 16
>> Mar 2011, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> writes
>> >
>> >
>> >On Wednesday 16 March 2011 04:09 PM, Roland Perry wrote:
>> > In message <
>> >
>> 16BC5877C4C91649AF7A89BF3BCA7AB82C9BB6C34F at SERVER01.globalpartners.local
>> > >, at 09:39:13 on Wed, 16 Mar 2011, Lisa Horner
>> > <LisaH at global-partners.co.uk> writes
>> >
>> >> Meanwhile, this ?net neutrality summit? which it is feared will
>> >> give rise to a 2 speed internet is happening in the UK
>> today....
>> >> watch this space.
>> >
>> >>
>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/mar/09/isps-outline-stance-net
>> >> -neutrality
>> > There is already a 2 speed Internet.
>> > Pay $10 a month and get one speed, pay $50 a month and get a
>> higher
>> > one.
>> >
>> >Roland, why dont you just accept, and not keep confusing people,
>> that
>> >there is big structural difference between differing speeds as per
>> what
>> >content user pays, and differing speeds as per what content
>> provider
>> >pays, and the Net neutrality issue deals with the second issue
>> alone.
>>
>> Unfortunately, that might be what *you* think NN means, and for all
>> I
>> know it's the standard meaning in your country. It's absolutely not
>> what
>> they mean when the UK press writes about it. (Think about it - the
>> biggest issue is restricting P2P and NNTP downloads of pirate
>> movies,
>> what "content provider" is there who would pay the networks to
>> remove
>> that restriction?)
>>
>> >You dont have to agree with the NN guys on what is right and what
>> is
>> >wrong, but why keep muddying established definitions.
>>
>> I would be very happy if there were differing words for the various
>> differing "meanings". Unfortunately, there are many different
>> concepts
>> which are all given the same name (NN). What I'm trying to do here
>> is
>> *agree* that there is this confusion, and that the outcome of
>> so-called
>> "Network Neutrality" debate in the UK is irrelevant to much of the
>> rest
>> of the world, because it's a different thing that's being debated.
>>
>> > What people want is the $50 Internet for $10, and for everyone in
>> > the country to be able to watch a High Definition[3] TV programme
>> at
>> > once.
>> >No, that is not at all what NN advoactes want, and you know that.
>>
>> But it's what the UK NN advocates want, it was a UK-based discussion
>> that was linked to.
>>
>> Here's what I posted in another forum about NN, a few days ago, hope
>> it
>> helps clarify things:
>>
>> <quote>
>>
>> Net Neutrality means different things to different people.
>>
>> Here in the UK it's about throttling bandwidth hogs like P2P and
>> iPlayer
>> in the busy hours.
>>
>> In developing countries it's about Megabytes per dollar being the
>> same
>> on fixed and mobile networks (fat chance of that in developed
>> countries either).
>>
>> In some jurisdictions it's about blocking VoIP (but that tends to be
>> an
>> incumbent nationalised telco protecting PSTN revenue and the
>> ability
>> to wiretap the calls, not bandwidth).
>>
>> In the USA it means throttling specific sites which don't pay you to
>> deliver their bandwidth-hogging content. (Although to some extent
>> that's also the iPlayer issue in UK). And a suspicion that as the
>> big
>> ISPs are owned by telcos, they might start blocking VoIP as well.
>>
>> [Although Skype video is an example of a site where the final two of
>> the
>> above can get a bit entangled].
>>
>> </quote>
>> --
>> Roland Perry
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>> governance at lists.cpsr.org
>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>
>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>> http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>> http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>
>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>> governance at lists.cpsr.org
>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>
>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>> http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>> http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>
>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>
>
> --
> Roland Perry
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
> http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
> http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
For all other list information and functions, see:
http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
http://www.igcaucus.org/
Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
More information about the Governance
mailing list