Re: Google Wants Its Own Fast Track on the Web - WSJ.com

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: John Levine <johnl () iecc com>
Date: December 15, 2008 7:35:32 AM EST
To: dave () farber net
Subject: Re: [IP] Re:   Google Wants Its Own Fast Track on the Web -  
WSJ.com

> Er, are you sure that isnt simply a peering agreement?

I always understood network neutrality to mean that a provider charges
the same price to to everyone who buys the same service.  If someone
wants to buy a faster connection, that's fine, so long as the price is
the same as what the provider charges itself.

This issue originally came up when telcos were charging independent
ISPs more for bare DSL circuits than the telco's captive ISP was
charging consumers for DSL ISP service over those same circuits.  Now
that we have the plague of deep packet inspection, I'd extend net
neutrality to mean that if two customers are paying the same, DPI does
the same things to them.

Sure, the name "net neutrality" has been hijacked by people who want
it to mean different things, but it'd be ahistorical to pretend that
people couldn't or can't pay for a faster connection.

Regards,
John Levine, johnl () iecc com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for  
Dummies",
Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://www.johnlevine.com, ex- 
Mayor
"More Wiener schnitzel, please", said Tom, revealingly.






-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com