Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : The *NEW* Frank Coluccio Technology Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ftth who wrote (14674)	4/19/2006 12:15:09 AM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 46821

Net Neutrality Technical Challenges By David Passmore \| Monday, April 03, 2006 [FAC: Earlier I stated that there were more considerations than merely the stipulated throughput in the last mile wire. David Passmore, below, begins to address some of those other issues (but doesn't go far enough, IMO, which I'll get to at a later time), from his latest article in the April 2006 issue of Business Communications Review: ] Much of the discussion surrounding “net neutrality”—ensuring that broadband Internet access providers do not discriminate against certain types of traffic traversing their network—focuses on service provider business models or legislative/regulatory efforts. But some significant technical challenges could inhibit net neutrality, even if it could somehow be legislated. How you view net neutrality depends on whether you’re a customer or a network operator. To customers, some network operators are “bad” because they want to adopt a business model that’s no longer flat-rate, but is tied to usage (potentially linked to traffic volumes, service quality and/or access to particular content). A provider might also be considered “bad” if it doesn’t treat all traffic equally. Such operator behavior hurts users and innovation (for reasons that are outside the scope of this column), which is why many consumer groups and third-party content providers are demanding net neutrality. From the operator perspective, a customer is “bad” if they consume most of the bandwidth without having to pay higher fees than those who place only modest demands on the network. Operators are also considering (and in some cases implementing) measures that ensure quality for their own content or network services, rather than just hoping there’s enough bandwidth to rely on best-effort packet delivery. This is particularly important to telcos trying to become content providers, who need to demonstrate that they can offer video at least as high-quality as that provided by cable. Conversely, cable operators need QOS mechanisms to ensure that their new voice services are at least as good as traditional POTS. Continued at: bcr.com