republican-creole
Search:  

 
 
   All ForumsHot TopicsGallery






how-to block ads


 
Forums » Google On Network Neutrality » More Confusing The Issue
Search Topic:
Share Topic:
RSS topic:
toggle:
flat / full
normal / watch
Post a:
Post a:
« CUSTOMERS already pay for their connection  
AuthorAll Replies


Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
USA

reply to pnh102
Re: More Confusing The Issue

I wouldn't oppose a telecom building a "fast lane" for their own stuff (HDTV, Digital Phone, etc) so long as the general Internet connection doesn't suffer. Suppose an ISP decides that they should getting more revenues from Digital Phone and so they degrade down all Internet connections to make services like Vonage unreliable. I would classify that as being against the principles of Network Neutrality.

The problem is that, as ISPs move from being merely "pipe providers" to "pipe and content providers", they will run into situations where their own service, delivered on their own lines, competes with third party services on third party lines. The temptation will be very great to find some way of leveraging the line ownership to better compete with the service.


en102
Canadian, eh?

join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME

I agree 100%.

Telcos/Cable Co's providing VoIP don't necessarily want apps such as Skype or Vonage competing.

Similarly, I suspect that YouTube and now Netflix online will be hitting road blocks.

ISPs are moving to the old AOL style where they sell it all, bundled, and will not want competition. Wireless has been like that since the start. Wireless won't allow for VoIP, streaming or anything outside of light browsing, unless its provided by them, and their content provider ... for a fee


n2jtx

join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY
·Optimum Online

reply to Jason Levine
said by Jason Levine See Profile :

I wouldn't oppose a telecom building a "fast lane" for their own stuff (HDTV, Digital Phone, etc) so long as the general Internet connection doesn't suffer. Suppose an ISP decides that they should getting more revenues from Digital Phone and so they degrade down all Internet connections to make services like Vonage unreliable. I would classify that as being against the principles of Network Neutrality.
As long as their "fast lane" does not take away from my service I am okay with it. If I am paying for a 10mbps speed and they throttle that down to 1mbps on outside connections so that they can deliver 10mpbs for "their" services then that would be against net neutrality principles.
--
I support the right to keep and arm bears.
Forums » Google On Network Neutrality« CUSTOMERS already pay for their connection  


Wednesday, 09-Dec 03:02:43 Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo | feedback | contact
over 10 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com.
page compression OFF
Most commented news this week
· [194] Sprint Sued For Distracted Driving Death
· [81] 3G Network Test Says AT&T Is Tops
· [72] Mediacom Unveils 105 Mbps Pricing
· [62] Sprint Poised For A Turnaround?
· [50] The Future Of Wi-Fi Is Bright
· [50] WPA Cracker: Test WPA-PSK Networks In 20 Minutes
· [47] Site Leaks Yahoo, Verizon Fed Data Share Pricing
· [44] Microwaving Your Innards Is Not 'Extreme'
· [39] Verizon LTE: 5-12 Mbps Downstream
· [20] AT&T Releases Network Reporting iPhone App
Most people now reading
· Man Downloads Child Porn "Accidentally," Faces 20 Years [Security]
· Windows 7 boot manager editing questions [Microsoft Help]
· [How to] Install Asterisk on an Asus WL-520GU router [VOIP Tech Chat]
· Maximizing Rogue DPS for 3.1 [World of Warcraft]
· Using DIR-615 C1/3.01 with Trendnet TEW-652BRP in N Mode [D-Link]
· ICC Strats??? [World of Warcraft]
· Comcast refused to install 400' feet. [Comcast HSI]
· Microsoft Security Bulletin(s) for December 8, 2009 [Security]
· buffs, nerfs, and 3.3 [World of Warcraft]
· SB6120 Firmware update [Comcast HSI]