[governance] Re: caucus contribution -> possible replacement terms for NN?

[Norbert Bollow]

In the online draft, the policy question given in paragraph 10 reads:

“How to maintain net neutrality as the key architectural principle of
the global Internet, and what shall be the mechanisms and institutions
involved in this process?”

Would the following be acceptable as a replacement?

“How to maintain the principle (sometimes referred to as ‘net
neutrality’) that the price which an ISPs charges their customer for
exchanging data packets via the Internet shall not depend on the
content of the data packets, nor on who specifically is the remote
party? What shall be the mechanisms and institutions involved in this
process?”

Greetings,
Norbert



Am Wed, 13 Feb 2013 13:56:21 -0500
schrieb Avri Doria <avri at acm.org>:

> Hi,
> 
> > If we're not to call this type of law a "network neutrality law",
> > what should we call it?
> 
> Call it something like "differential charging for content" or
> differential charging based on source or differential charging based
> on destination ...
> 
> That or some similar description is something that can be discussed. 
> 
> NN is just a container that we have thrown everything from
> differential service for maintenance packets to premium streaming
> services to differential charging for content ...  And when we do so,
> we lose track of what we are talking about and we wander around in
> circles.
> 
> Notice that they did not reference NN in the law.
> 
> I am not sure "Differential charging according to traffic type" is a
> good topic for a main theme or even a main session, but it is better
> then condemning a main session to the ambiguity of NN.
> 
> avri
> 
> 
> 
> On 13 Feb 2013, at 13:18, Norbert Bollow wrote:
> 
> > McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 12:56 PM, Avri Doria <avri at ella.com> wrote:
> >>> I have long argued that NN is an overloaded term in which we all
> >>> talk past each other.
> >> +1
> > 
> > Here's an except from news coverage from when the Dutch network
> > neutrality law was passed:
> > 
> >  "Under the new law, mobile internet providers like KPN won't be
> > able to charge for access to particular services like Skype or
> > throttle traffic through them — both techniques that the company
> > was intent on using to manage its mobile traffic.
> > 
> >  Some exceptional reasons, such as network congestion and security,
> >  are allowed for slowing down users' connections, but the general
> >  thrust of the law is that operators ought to be blind to the
> > traffic they carry and treat all of it equally."
> > 
> > If we're not to call this type of law a "network neutrality law",
> > what should we call it?
> > 
> > Greetings,
> > Norbert
> > 
> 
> 


-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/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