how-to block ads
|
Uniqs:
1458 |
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
 w0go.O
join:2001-08-30
Springfield, OR
2 edits | no one owns the internet The internet is an public massive web of connected PCs and networks, and no one should have the right to limit or block someone elses traffic. This isn't a private network owned by some company where they can pick and choose and manage in precise detail. If they want to be apart of the Internet as we know it, all traffic should be equal and allowed and no ISP should be able to limit, block, modify, etc anything that is being sent over it. If they want to do that then they can create their own private network, that's not what the internet is. | |
|   tubbynetreminds me of the danse russePremium,MVM
join:2008-01-16
Chandler, AZ
kudos:1 | Re: no one owns the internet said by w0g:The internet is an public massive web of connected PCs and networks, and no one should have the right to limit or block someone elses traffic. This isn't a private network owned by some company where they can pick and choose and manage in precise detail. the issue is, how are those pc's all interconnected? by interconnecting a series of private networks. i connect via cox cable. they own that network by either performing a buildout of plant or by purchasing smaller providers and incorporating the plant into the overall infrastructure.
these private isps feel they should be able to manage traffic in a reasonable way because they are responsible for maintaining the overall quality of service to the rest of their users. and, since they own the network, they feel they can do what they need to do.
this is the main point of contention between pro-consumer advocates and pro-business advocates. the pc crowd wants everything transparent, unrestricted, and uncapped, while the pb crowd wants to make sure that they aren't having to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars because a few select people in the regional market are saturating a few pieces of backhaul or hardware. its a delicate balancing act, which is why there is such a heated debate.
q.
--
"...if I in my north room dance naked, grotesquely before my mirror waving my shirt round my head and singing softly to myself..." | |
| | w0go.O
join:2001-08-30
Springfield, OR | Re: no one owns the internet I have no problem with ISPs adjusting the price and services they provide to their customers, and that's what everything you said really is about. If an ISP wants to limit services and traffic in some other way, or prefer their own traffic or content over someone elses, they should disconnect from the internet and make their network private. The internet is inheritly open, undistriminated, and that's just part of the game if you want to be connected. | |
| | |  JKM
join:2009-06-08
Seymour, MO | Re: no one owns the internet All ISPs purchase their Internet bandwidth. They then resell it as a service on their infrastructure. What part of free enterprise do you not understand? Bandwidth costs many small ISPs $300.00 per MB, per month. When they are using 50MB per month they pay only $100.00 per MB, per month. Seldom do they pay less that $30-40.00 per MB, per month.
The real problem is not most of the ISPs. It is the lack of availability of competitively priced bandwidth. IMHO the real problem is the Middle Mile Infrastructure is far behind the Last Mile technology and ambitions. If they would get the bandwidth to the Last Mile Infrastructure, competition would fix the problem.
If a company selling you Internet service isn't profitable, they go out of business. How would you like to have to look for a provider two or three times a year because yours went out of business, due to bandwidth hogs. Or better yet, how would you like to buy your bandwidth from the wholesalers for say $1800.00 a month for a 18 Mb pipe because there is no ISP in your area.
Let's put the problem in the proper perspective. We have a small percentage of users who would use the majority of bandwidth if allowed. Middle Mile wholesale bandwidth is severely limited by the technology serving it. In order to stay in business and meet the needs of all customers, limits must be set until unlimited bandwidth is available at the wholesale level.
--
Begin with the end in mind! | |
|
|  funchordsHelloPremium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:6 | said by tubbynet:the pb crowd wants to make sure that they aren't having to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars because a few select people in the regional market are saturating a few pieces of backhaul or hardware. Except when it isn't. And when the cure doesn't fit the problem.
The FIRST time the AP tried it, Comcast blocked the Holy Bible (4 MB). This wasn't a bandwidth hog, on a multi-night dozens-of-gigabyte feast of bandwidth consumption. It was one small and simple upload: FAIL.
The extension of your message is that the consumer wants it all for no money. The business wants to provide nothing for all of the money. I don't see that as the controversy. This isn't about traffic streams at all, it's about revenue streams.
I see TV and Phone companies seeing the Internet as a threat to their core businesses. What was and still is an add-on service that can be cheaply provided for a premium price threatens to replace the core businesses. The ISPs of tomorrow will have to replace that lost income from TV and Phone -- since TV and phone can be offered over-the-top.
That's a tough problem for them, but the Internet-only user shouldn't be the one forced to solve it.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- District of Columbia -- KJ7RL
Test your Broadband connection today! -- »measurementlab.net/ | |
| | | | | Re: no one owns the internet Ironically, the fact that Comcast delayed (it didn't block it altogether) a BitTorrent upload of the King James Bible merely shows that it was not censoring content. Which is good. Rather, it was preventing abuse of its network by BitTorrent. Which is also good. | |
| | | | | | Re: no one owns the internet said by SuperWISP:Ironically, the fact that Comcast delayed (it didn't block it altogether) a BitTorrent upload of ... This is such BS. If I didn't know better I would think you were a mouth for Comcast. You have to know that Comcast was playing man in the middle and spoofing rst packets on a connection. I don't give a damn what is being transfered, you don't break the internet that way. This is fraudulently pretending to be someone else on the internet and it should absolutely be illegal. Everyone at Comcast who had anything to do with this should be ashamed of themselves and you should be ashamed of yourself for defending it. | |
| | | | |
1 edit | Re: no one owns the internet said by petecarlson:You have to know that Comcast was playing man in the middle It wasn't playing. The ISP is the man in the middle. And one of its most important responsibilities in that role is to prevent abuse of the network. That's just what it was doing: stopping abuse. Every customer should be glad that this is done, because it ensures quality of service. | |
| | | | | | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | Re: no one owns the internet Or quality of disservice.
Actively killing BitTorrent connections is bad mojo.
Throttling them down to a set number of Mbps/Kbps and clearly stating what that throttle is, I can take. Blocking them altogether, not cool. | |
| | | | | | | | said by SuperWISP:said by petecarlson:You have to know that Comcast was playing man in the middle It wasn't playing. The ISP is the man in the middle. And one of its most important responsibilities in that role is to prevent abuse of the network. That's just what it was doing: stopping abuse. Every customer should be glad that this is done, because it ensures quality of service. Absolute crap. One could queue a packet, drop a packet etc but to drop a connection by pretending to be the device on the one end and then telling the other end to shut down the connection? How on earth are you defending this? | |
|
 RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY | said by w0g:The internet is an public massive web of connected PCs and networks, and no one should have the right to limit or block someone elses traffic. This isn't a private network owned by some company where they can pick and choose and manage in precise detail. If they want to be apart of the Internet as we know it, all traffic should be equal and allowed and no ISP should be able to limit, block, modify, etc anything that is being sent over it. If they want to do that then they can create their own private network, that's not what the internet is. The problem is that they regard the "Last Mile" part (ie: The path being covered from the user until there is a connection to a peering point) as their own private network. Thus they feel that they have already done so and can thus control what flows over their network on its way to/from the Internet (ie: to/from a peering point with the Internet Backbone and other ISP's Networks). IOW: They want to treat their network as a gateway to other networks via the Internet not as a dumb transport for Internet Traffic. | |
| | | said by w0g:The internet is an public massive web of connected PCs and networks, ...all of which are privately owned, controlled, and administered. The Internet was designed so that these devices and networks could be interconnected but still remain under their owners' control. In short, it was specifically designed so that NASA (for example) could have and enforce different acceptable use policies on its network than Stanford University or Sun Microsystems (to name three institutions which were on the original ARPANet/Internet).
In other words, your assertion that "no one owns the Internet" is not correct. Anyone who owns a computer or network that participates in it owns a part of it, and gets to administer that part as he or she sees fit. This is the original social contract of the Internet. | |
| | | said by w0g:The internet is an public massive web of connected PCs and networks, and no one should have the right to limit or block someone elses traffic. I think you need some modifiers here.
Can I limit a connection to the throughput they are paying for?
Can I block UCE?
Can I block traffic to/from you after you move more then an agreed upon limit?
I think your post is ill thought out and deserves to be ripped apart. You are providing an easy target and I implore you to think about what you are writing. | |
|
| |
|
