On 11/12/2014 7:05 AM, Matt Hoppes wrote: > Is there any more information on what exactly the FCC is proposing to > propose? I know there was Title II thrown around....
There is no firm proposal. Last week Tom let out a "trial baloon" suggesting that he'd adopt something based on the Mozilla proposal. That would leave all access providers vertically integrated and not subject to Title II on their access networks (so ISPs would not be allowed to buy raw DSL or cable modem service to compete with the wire owners' captive ISPs), but would treat peering and wholesale exchange of information between computers as Title II Common Carriage, subject to regulatory scrutiny. This is of course ridiculous on its face, especially if you're familiar with Title 47 itself and its legislative history. Essentially they're saying that pi=3, except on Tuesdays when it's marked down to 2.97. > How would that impact us, or any other carrier? Net neutrality is about > giving all packets equal access -- if I already do that, do I have > anything to fear? If you do that, you probably have to fear congestion collapse first. If you buy upstream from a single provider, no peering of your own, you're probably outside of the scope of that proposal. If you have an ASN, things could get very weird indeed. I see the proposal as clearly flawed legally. So do Verizon and I think Comcast. It's appeal bait. This is politics -- there's political pressure to do something about a visible non-problem (the Internet itself is unregulated, so it obviously *must* be under intense attack by "cable f*ckery"), and other political pressure to not do anything about a less visible problem (lack of competition). So it will go back to court and probably get overturned after the next election. Just like last time. Lather, rinse, repeat. Obama's proclamation doesn't mean anything either. Tom is his political appointee. Now as it happened, Tom screwed up big time, has fallen and he can't get up. So Obama was basically trying to politically undo the damage, giving Tom an excuse to walk back his plan. If you saw Steve's & my talk on NN at WISPAPALOOZA, you'll know how complicated this can be. My own position is that Title II should be applied to the lowest-layer offerings of rivalrous facility owners (ILEC, cable, CMRS) but not ISPs per se, or WISPs (non-rivalrous frequency users). The "internet" concept dates back to 1972 (invented in France!) and separates the "network" (what carriers provide) from the "internetwork". The trouble is, we've lost a layer and the internet and network layers are usually merged. That's broken. IP is being used as a network when it was meant to be an internetwork. > I for one would love to see Net neutrality fall on its face, the big > ISPs start throtteling traffic, and just have customers driven to us > little guys who don't throttle. > > On 11/11/14, 8:33 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: >> from: >> http://tech.slashdot.org/story/14/11/11/2345213/fcc-confirms-delay-of-new-net-neutrality-rules-until-2015 >> >> "/The Federal Communications Commission will abandon >> <http://www.dailydot.com/politics/net-neutrality-fcc-tom-wheeler-delayed-obama/> >> its earlier >> promise >> <https://www.fcc.gov/blog/setting-record-straight-fcc-s-open-internet-rules> >> to >> make a decision on new net neutrality rules this year. Instead, FCC >> Press Secretary Kim Hart said, "there will not be a vote on open >> internet rules on the December meeting agenda. That would mean rules >> would now be finalized in 2015." The FCC's confirmation of the delay >> came just as President Barack Obama launched a campaign >> <http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/11/10/statement-president-net-neutrality> >> to >> persuade the agency to reclassify broadband Internet service as a public >> utility./Opensource.com is also running an interview with a legal >> advisor at the FCC >> <http://opensource.com/government/14/11/fcc-advisor-talks-net-neutrality>. >> He says, "There will be a burden on providers. The question is, 'Is that >> burden justified?' And I think our answer is 'Yes.'"" >> -- >> >> Josh Reynolds, Chief Information Officer >> SPITwSPOTS, www.spitwspots.com <http://www.spitwspots.com> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wireless mailing list >> Wireless@wispa.org >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> > _______________________________________________ > Wireless mailing list > Wireless@wispa.org > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > -- Fred R. Goldstein k1io fred "at" interisle.net Interisle Consulting Group +1 617 795 2701 _______________________________________________ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
