[Commotion-discuss] FCC and the world of mesh networks

[Ben West]

The FCC's endorsement of a "Fast Lane" pretty much conflicts exactly with
what Net Neutrality advocates had been pressing for.  It is not "neutral."

That said, ISPs are correct in that delivering copious amounts of streaming
content from Netflix, Hulu, etc to their subscribers do indeed incur them a
large cost to transport specifically that content, so they have motivation
to recoup those costs via higher usage fees or by charging Netflix, Hulu,
etc. directly.  Nevertheless, it is illuminating to re-parse the ISPs'
argument that, yes, they do indeed sell their subscribers access to the
entire Internet, but that service now would no longer include the
expectation of fast access to certain content providers (e.g. Netflix,
Hulu) who don't already have some "fast-lane" arrangement with the ISPs.

So, the ISPs are hoping the FCC officially greenlights their desire to
offer tiered access to the Internet, based on whatever terms the ISPs
choose to set, whether justified by actual operational costs of delivering
streaming content, or just simply arbitrary.

My personal opinion, for the sake of elegance, is that 5Mbit/s, 10Mbit/s,
20Mbit/s or whatever speed access to the Internet should be access at that
speed to the entire Internet.  If lots of ISP subscribers want fast access
to Netflix's servers, for example, that should simply be a cost of doing
business for that ISP, who would then be free to recoup that cost by
raising their rates, streamlining their internal operation for faster
transport, etc.  Indeed, competing ISPs may be able to offer sufficiently
fast access to Netflix for lower rates, and if so, that's perfectly fine.
The market would be a level playing field.

The "Fast Lane" is *not* a level playing field.  It permits the largest
ISPs to collude over what content they chose to offer at useful speeds, and
it reduces their motivation to make system-wide upgrades or improvements
for increased bandwidth for everyone.



On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 10:08 AM, Sphinx <sphinx at indymedia.org> wrote:

> What do people think could be the implications of this for the adoption
> and spread of mesh networks?
>
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/24/technology/fcc-new-net-neutrality-rules.html?_r=0
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Commotion-discuss mailing list
> Commotion-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/commotion-discuss
>



-- 
Ben West
http://gowasabi.net
ben at gowasabi.net
314-246-9434
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/commotion-discuss/attachments/20140424/2ce62f8c/attachment.html>