[governance] NET NEUTRALITY AND MORE

[parminder]

On Tuesday 28 May 2013 07:28 PM, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <D48B7CB2-B0FB-475E-8D7B-9E6887A232BF at ella.com>, at 
> 14:39:54 on Tue, 28 May 2013, Avri Doria <avri at ella.com> writes
>
>> I think we need unpack the term Net Neutrality and actually agree on 
>> what we are talking about.
>
> That would be useful.

I dont think there is any greater confusion about the meaning of the NN 
term that almost any subject of social legislation... NN regulation is 
enshrined in the law of a few countries, and can not really be unclear 
about what NN is. I am ready to take NN in the meaning in which US 
regulatory provisions take it. It is rather well defined there (a 
different matter that they decided not to extend NN regulation to 
wireless networks.)

parminder

>
> [I'll use the term "throttle" to mean "de-prioritise in the absence of 
> any funds to make me change my mind".]
>
> Is NN about a delivery network throttling content unless the distant 
> content-provider comes up with some specific extra funding for their 
> traffic (over and above the normal peering/no-settlement basis 
> trickling down from their ISP to the delivery network).
>
> Is NN about a delivery network throttling content unless the end user 
> comes up with specific extra funding for content from that content 
> provider.
>
> Is NN about a delivery network throttling its competitor's content 
> (when that network is a multi-play offer, with its own pay-per-view 
> content).
>
> Is NN about end users paying the same per byte for traffic delivered 
> to a mobile phone as to a landline.
>
> In NN about some networks deciding (with or without a court order) 
> that some content sites should not be delivered at all (eg Pirate Bay).
>
> Is NN about preventing the sending of email unless certain technical 
> hoops are jumped through, that purport to fend off spammers.
>
> Is NN a way of defining "end to end", and hence means "no carrier 
> grade NAT, thanks".
>
> Is NN a way for users to demand they get the same bytes-per-second 
> throughput on their Internet connection at 8pm when all their fellow 
> subscribers are saturating it with catch-up-TV, as they do at 8am when 
> their fellow subscribers aren't.
>
> [nb. Not all answers have to be "yes", and not all answers have to be 
> "no"].


-------------- 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