funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC
 ·Verizon Online DSL
 ·Skype
| reply to Nerdtalker
Re: Must be open source!
I think the process that they're taking is a bit "Rube Goldberg"-ish. I've talked to Laird Popkin at Pando about Open Source and he assures me that it will be Open Source. However, the ISP's data (the input that drives some of this behavior) might be closed or obfuscated somehow (I really haven't looked into that). Some ISPs are sensitive about competitors using the data to learn their secret recipe.
I still haven't taken a position on it, but my fears have gone from "be afraid, be very afraid" (especially concerning the who's who that is in the DCIA) to one of "as long as users will have free choice of applications and protocols, then this is just another market entrant and it will live and die on its own merits."
I am put off with the test results of 235% and 898%, since the results are not described in terms that can be independently reproduced. But that's just the technician in me.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More features, more fun, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...
|
|
BIGMIKE
Premium
join:2002-06-07
Westminster, CA |  reply to swhx7
p2p
FCC slaps Comcast, but lays foundation for future bandwidth restrictions »www.tgdaily.com/content/view/39002/128/ |
|
Nerdtalker
Working Hard, Or Hardly Working?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-02-18
Tucson, AZ
clubs:
1 edit | reply to swhx7
I've heard about this P4P conglomerate before, and although I'm not sure whether it's OSS, they're very very reputable. |
|
swhx7
Premium
join:2006-07-23
Elbonia
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to AstroBoy
said by AstroBoy  :Must be open source! Or I will not trust it.
That would be a necessary condition for me too. But even if it's open source, if it's run by the ISP, it's still untrustworthy in my view, and will be closely monitored.
The more important question is about:
quote:
Will the system come with anti-piracy provisions and if so, will it create an ISP gatekeeper situation to wall off "non-sanctioned" P2P content?
That's probably the goal: make the p4p easy and fast, but it will have only the selection approved by the ISP and the copyright holders, and maybe laden with DRM, fees and whatnot.
Then they'll try to demonize regular p2p, implying that anything outside the approved application must be piracy. Then throttle, ban or otherwise interfere with regular p2p, based on a claim that p4p should be able to do everything the user wants. |
|
