nanog mailing list archives

Re: Net Neutrality


From: "David Diaz" <davediaz.tech () gmail com>
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 13:03:29 -0400


That was an interesting point. Basically you are claiming your network
does not have all the resources it needs for peak utilization and
therefore you are degrading some traffic.

This was a very big topic at the voice peering fabric mtg last week.
Most operators are terrified this means their voip service will be
affected.

I see that as an operational issue. Whether all packets should be
treated equally.

On 4/6/06, Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu <Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu> wrote:
On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 11:18:24 EDT, David Diaz said:
The list is extremely quiet on Net Neutrality. I cannot find a single
post. I thought this would be a good debate topic.  The usual gov
regulation vs free market argument along side the RBOC vs Everyone
else topic.

This list is about network operations.  There's other lists devoted to
crackpot business models. ;)

On the other hand, if somebody's $DAYJOB has decided to offer selective
performance degradation as a business model, we'll be happy to discuss it
then....






Current thread: