asdfdfdfdfdfdf
@Level3.net
| reply to SuperWISP
Re: Rearranging the deck chairs
" P2P by its very nature is a way of setting up servers on ISPs' networks, taking their upstream bandwidth without paying for it."
1.Why should servers be against the TOS anyway?
In what way, if a person buys a connection that is X MB down and Y MB up are they not paying for their bandwidth if they use the Y upstream capabilities of the line they pay for? Why should we accept that if you use bandwidth to download you are behaving acceptably but if you use bandwidth to upload you are stealing from the isp?
2.If the network was designed only for one way distribution of content then why shouldn't the onus be on a company that wants to be an internet service provider to adapt the network design to be able to meet the two way communication needs of the internet? In other words why should we allow a company to redefine internet service as a one way content distribution system?
3. I understand that a person running a server is, in general, more likely to consume greater amounts of bandwidth but why can't this be dealt with using bandwidth caps, such as we have had for quite a long time? In other words, rather than outlawing uses such as running a server you simply place a boundary like 100GB a month of transfer. Again I don't understand why certain uses of a communication connection should be classified as stealing while other uses are not. This is just another way of discriminating against certain applications when the application, or the way the person chooses to use their connection, shouldn't be a concern for the isp. |
