The list is extremely quiet on Net Neutrality. I cannot find a single
post. I thought this would be a good debate topic. The usual gov
regulation vs free market argument along side the RBOC vs Everyone
else topic.
David
Dave,
Hmm, I think that's burried in the various flavors of what net neutrality might actually mean to various people, I certainly can think of a number of different ways to define neutral.. ;-).. but, I might well be mistaken in my confidence that somebody on NANOG has touched on at least a few aspects.
If you start at a much simpler topic, and I really believe that it is a subset of the net neutrality issues, start with defining wholesale (some might even argue that they're the same thing, which I don't subscribe to). There are a huge number of variations on that topic alone.
Best regards,
Christian
On Thu, 2006-04-06 at 11:18:24 -0400, David Diaz proclaimed...
The list is extremely quiet on Net Neutrality. I cannot find a single
post. I thought this would be a good debate topic. The usual gov
regulation vs free market argument along side the RBOC vs Everyone
else topic.
North American Network OPERATORS' Group, not North American Network
POLITICIANS' Group. You might have more fun trolling elsewhere 
You must be living in a curious world where operations is not constantly involved in policy or politics! 
This list is about network operations. There's other lists devoted to
crackpot business models.
On the other hand, if somebody's $DAYJOB has decided to offer selective
performance degradation as a business model, we'll be happy to discuss it
then....
On Thu, 2006-04-06 at 11:29:44 -0400, Christian Kuhtz proclaimed...
You must be living in a curious world where operations is not
constantly involved in policy or politics!
Damn, I was dreaming! You just had to wake me up...grr....
Oh Ambien, sweet Ambien, where art thou?
Vladis, Vladis, you really think it hasn't been?
Just because all the legal issues haven't been sorted out, doesn't mean that it isn't a) the declared goal or b) the technology is not ready and developed. Oh you have little faith in, for example, RBOCs and their burning desire to evolve out of the plumbing business.
We've already discussed this in great detail, but that doesn't mean that the demise of the "Net Neutrality" amendment yesterday can't prompt us to do it again.
http://news.com.com/2100-1028_3-6058223.html?part=rss&tag=6058223&subj=news
If you want to review a previous flamewar, searching the archives for "Two Tiered Internet" is a good starting point.
David Diaz wrote:
You probably left it in the fridge, while you were making those deep-fried twinkies in your sleep. Mmm, sleep twinkies....
Seriously though, to the OP; this has gotta be some sort of troll, right?
matto
--matt@snark.net------------------------------------------<darwin><
Moral indignation is a technique to endow the idiot with dignity.
- Marshall McLuhan
That was an interesting point. Basically you are claiming your network
does not have all the resources it needs for peak utilization and
therefore you are degrading some traffic.
This was a very big topic at the voice peering fabric mtg last week.
Most operators are terrified this means their voip service will be
affected.
I see that as an operational issue. Whether all packets should be
treated equally.
Dang, Dave, what did you have to go and do that for? We'll miss you, now
that you'll have to be disappeared.
-Bill