<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>Topic &#x27;A classic Net Neutrality case.  Pay or face crippling&#x27; in forum &#x27;&#x27; - dslreports.com</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/A-classic-Net-Neutrality-case-Pay-or-face-crippling-25201535</link>
<description></description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Mon, 17 Jun 2013 23:40:25 EDT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Jun 2013 23:40:25 EDT</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>Re: A classic Net Neutrality case.  Pay or face crippling</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-A-classic-Net-Neutrality-case-Pay-or-face-crippling-25206449</link>
<description><![CDATA[tschmidt posted : But this is an interesting wrinkle.  Does not appear Comcast is using their control of eyeballs to  target particular sites or disadvantage potential competitors.<br><br>Rather they are using their control of captive eyeballs to "encourage" CDN's to pay Comcast for the privilege of connecting to their network. And using TATA's congestion to "encourage" other transit carriers to peer with them.<br><br>/tom]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-A-classic-Net-Neutrality-case-Pay-or-face-crippling-25206449</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 15 Dec 2010 18:34:07 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>A classic Net Neutrality case.  Pay or face crippling</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/A-classic-Net-Neutrality-case-Pay-or-face-crippling-25201535</link>
<description><![CDATA[KrK posted : Bingo.<br><br>Time to come down on Comcast like an anvil.  Won't happen, however.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/A-classic-Net-Neutrality-case-Pay-or-face-crippling-25201535</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 14 Dec 2010 17:39:52 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
