dslreports logo
 story category
New Network Neutrality Laws May Do Little
ISPs fight, for their right, for 'reaonable network management'

CNET insists that Comcast's use of forged RST packets to throttle upstream p2p use could be perfectly legal under the new network neutrality laws being proposed. Just like the FCC's policy statement (pdf), which insists consumers are "entitled to run applications and services of their choice" except in cases of "reasonable network management" -- the bills may do little to thwart anything but the most egregious infractions.

The EFF this week released a report stating that Comcat's particular brand of traffic shaping is anything but reasonable.

Most recommended from 64 comments



karlmarx
join:2006-09-18
Moscow, ID

2 recommendations

karlmarx

Member

What is 'reasonable'

Reasonable, according to the dictionary is "agreeable to reason or sound judgment; logical"

If the operator was interrupting your phone calls, and saying "I'm going to hang up now", would we stand for that? NO. Because it's not a reasonable judgment. Why does comcast get to do EXACTLY that just because it's a computer talking? If all your web pages timed out, because comcast was forging RST packets for that, would anyone stand for it? NO. Because it's not reasonable.

Reasonable is providing WHAT THEY ARE ADVERTISING. If the ADVERTISE 20mb/sec, then you should EXPECT to get 20mb/sec. If they CAN'T PROVIDE IT, then DON'T SELL IT. Simple enough concept to understand.

Maybe it's time we look very closely at what they are advertising, and THEN what the ACTUALLY provide, and punish them for selling under false pretenses. If you bought a honda civic with the expectations of getting 40mpg, and only got 10mpg, you would most certainly go to the dealer to get your money back. If you paid the plumber to fix your pipes, and he didn't fix them, then you wouldn't pay him. If Comcast is advertising ALWAYS ON internet, and you CAN'T ALWAYS USE IT, then why should they get a free pass for false advertising?