> On Dec 11, 2015, at 7:00 AM, Chris Adams <c...@cmadams.net>wrote: > > Once upon a time, Christopher Morrow <morrowc.li...@gmail.com> said: >> On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 1:07 PM, William Kenny >> <william.r.ke...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> is that still net neutrality? >> >> who cares? mobile was excepted from the NN rulings. > > Any why the desire for extra regulation for Internet services? > > Shippers (you know, actual Common Carriers) do things like this all the > time, especially when they are busy (congested). I had a package ship > Tuesday; it sat at the receiving location for 24 hours before the first > move, then it reached my city early this morning, but since I didn't pay > extra for timed delivery (and the shipper doesn't have special > arrangements), it didn't go on a truck today. I should get it tomorrow. > > I could have paid more to get it faster, and some large-scale shippers > have special arrangements that seem to get their packages priority. How > is this different from Internet traffic?
I think this conflates arrangements that retailers/shippers make with each other and the agreements that consumers have with their own network supplier. a) As a customer of a retailer that ships physical packages, my contract is with the retailer. They promise to deliver on a certain date, or they yell at the shipper. b) As an *network subscriber*, my contract/agreement is with my (cable/DSL/satellite/mobile) ISP. I pay them to deliver my bits - without any discussion of where they come from. Most of these agreements don't provide much of a service level. But I still have the understanding that *all* data coming to/from me will have substantially the rate, latency, and packet loss that is advertised. Specifically, I have the expectation that data from two streams (say, one from a Binge On participant, one from an unsubsidized source like an Ubuntu ISO download) should arrive with substantially the same rate, latency and packet loss. I can then remain ignorant/uninvolved with whether any source wants to use CDNs, or to subsidize a subscriber's data plan, or make any other arrangement between the data source and the intervening providers. As long as data is arriving at the contracted rate, I am getting what I paid for. Isn't that a useful and testable basis for understanding Net Neutrality? Doesn't this address (at least part of) the argument about guaranteeing equal access to all content whether subsidized or not?
