Politicos divided on need for 'net neutrality' mandate

TalkBack 3 of 22:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

a few concerns here - possibly due to the wording used by the story ...

I have a few concerns on both sides of the argument ...

First, the way I read it, the general gist of the broadband providers is that they have never, and do not have any plans to "impede network activity"; but that anything that prevented them from doing so would discourage further growth.

Is that high-quality corporate double-talk, or what?!? I would be curious as to their corporate definition of "network activity". The context implies that it's any network activity from any source. But if they do not now nor have plans to impede it, then this law would be a non-issue for them. Either they actually mean something more restricted when they say "network activity" (only things that originate within their network maybe?), or they actually want the flexibility to restrict the pipes later, even though they have no formal plans YET.

Second, but on the other side of the argument, how is the law to be phrased? As shown in the story, "the provisions would bar broadband providers from favoring one company's site over another, from giving their own content preferential treatment and from creating 'private networks that are superior to the Internet access they offer consumers generally.'" The "AND from creating" is a concern; if the consumer is willing to pay more for a higher level of performance, then that should be allowed. The "AND" in the above wording suggests that both preferred treatment, AND higher performing private networks would be banned.

Lastly, are our politicians savvy enough to write the law in such a way that spammers and virus/worm authors won't be able to use it to claim they are being discriminated against, and that the broadband providers must offer equal access to their messages and their sites? If the bill is written so that "all information (transmitted over broadband networks) is made available on the same terms so that no bit is better than another one" as the story states, then it clearly needs to have allowances made for locking down some traffic for legitimate security reasons.

Posted by: ac2_z   Posted on: 02/07/06 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• ChangeAuditor for Exchange ScriptLogic Quest ChangeAuditor for Exchange proactively audits all activity, provides ... Download Now
• ENTERPRISE SECURITY GETS SMART Trend Micro IT security professionals are increasingly more concerned about the ... Download Now
• Memory Analysis Best Practices Within Eclipse Quest Software Poor Java performance costs your business money and customers. However ... Download Now