No Government rules on packet throttling, blocking, colleague says on Capitol Hill

No Government rules on packet throttling, blocking, colleague says on Capitol Hill

Summary: Colleague George Ou, who is not a proponent of most net neutrality regulations, stated his opinions before a Congressional staffer-panel on Network Management sponsored by iGrowthGlobal.That outfit, whose board is full of board members who have served in a similar capacity on the Pox on consumer rights that is the Progress & Freedom Foundation, a group that declares as part of its goal that:governments resist the temptation to regulate, tax and control.

SHARE:

bittorrent4.jpg

Colleague George Ou, who is not a proponent of most net neutrality regulations, stated his opinions before a Congressional staffer-panel on Network Management sponsored by iGrowthGlobal.

That outfit, whose board is full of board members who have served in a similar capacity on the Pox on consumer rights that is the Progress & Freedom Foundation, a group that declares as part of its goal that:

governments resist the temptation to regulate, tax and control. Government has important roles to play in society, including protecting property rights and individual liberties, but its tendency is to reach beyond its legitimate functions in ways that harm consumers, burden citizens and slow progress.

OK, so now that you know of iGrowthGlobal's heritage as a group that is afraid of tech regulations that will help consumers here and now, you might be further sensitized to a perception that George's honest feelings and related testimony, fit this hesitant-to-regulate, free market template.

In Goerge's own post this morning, he points to his testimony as noting that because today's broadband networks have modest capacity, some Torrent throttling is necessary as a traffic management tool. And that necessity means that it preferable that throttling, on the part of say, Comcast, should be a practice judged by the free market, rather than ruled by "Goverment."

George said:

Then I explained that Cable networks and Wireless networks are shared-medium networks that are constrained in capacity and that they weren’t built nor sold to be content servers for the rest of the Internet. Wireless networks are even more scarce in terms of capacity because of the scarcity of spectrum and many of the smaller ISPs would be put out of business if the Government made rules banning P2P throttling or P2P blocking.

Without those smaller wireless ISPs that cover the rural areas that the larger companies don’t want to cover, those Americans living in rural America would be cut off from the Internet and possibly even their phone service. We have plenty of choices on getting content but few choices on broadband carriers and the Government must keep this in mind when making network management policies.

A network management guru and diligent researcher as well as an esteemed colleague, George tends to favor market-based solutions. That's fine, but I don't.

Left lightly or non-regulated in the packets- preference realm, I fear the broadband Internet monopolists will strike deals with preferred content providers, and feel unrestrained to nickel and dime consumers with every fee their share-price boosting, avaricious nature will countenance.

[poll id=203]

Topics: Networking, Government, Government US

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

10 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • He's right

    Packet throttling should only be regulated where the service in question enjoys some form of protected monopoly, such as when cable companies have municipal charters.

    Oh, wait ...
    Yagotta B. Kidding
    • That's the Deal

      All the communications deliverers have used government
      subsidies to build infrastructure. The government has looked
      the other way or abetted as they eroded the duty side of
      common carrier status while maintaining the liability protection
      granted. And who, with their 90 day or 12 month teaser rates
      have been building high speed demand. Now -gasp- they don't
      have the tubes to handle the stuff the new customers signed up
      for?

      If tiered access is allowed, Microsoft will write the check to
      AT&T for a "premium" service, which means Apple and Google
      get degraded service. Apple and Google then write a check to
      get parity. The good news is that since the phone companies
      have shown a religious devotion to free enterprise and the
      tenets of Adam Smith, those profits will be used to increase
      capacity and reverse the broadband lag this nation experiences.
      Okay, a little levity to brighten the morning.

      While the argument from a pure abstracted economic theory
      point of view makes sense, these are the phone and cable
      companies and there is more than little bit of track record
      there.
      DannyO_0x98
      • Ernestine

        [i]While the argument from a pure abstracted economic theory
        point of view makes sense, these are the phone and cable
        companies and there is more than little bit of track record
        there.[/i]

        "We're the broadband company. We don't care. We don't have to."
        Yagotta B. Kidding
  • RE: No Government rules on packet throttling, blocking, colleague says on Capitol Hill

    It's called projection, Russell: because you're in favor of government interfering with everybody else (aka socialism), you're afraid that business is going to interfere with little old you. Where's the evidence, besides the hothouse of your mind, that "broadband Internet monopolists will blah blah blah"? Your language gives you away, Russell.

    Why do you think, Russell, that government workers are the only ones who can be trusted? Do you think business people are evil robots from Mars? Do you think government workers become saints when they cross the Beltway? Here's a clue, Russell: businessmen are human beings just like government workers. If you can't trust businessmen, then how can you trust government?
    Vesicant
    • Checks and balances

      [i]Why do you think, Russell, that government workers are the only ones who can be trusted? Do you think business people are evil robots from Mars? Do you think government workers become saints when they cross the Beltway? Here's a clue, Russell: businessmen are human beings just like government workers. If you can't trust businessmen, then how can you trust government?[/i]

      Because, in theory, we have at least some influence over the government. Monopolists like Comcast have power without responsibility.

      If you want to argue the superiority of the US model of broadband provisioning, please compare to those horrible Asian and European countries where the government has been less [i]laissez-faire[/i] on the subject and show us how much better the US has done.
      Yagotta B. Kidding
  • RE: No Government rules on packet throttling, blocking, colleague says on Capitol Hill

    You HAVE to have network management. Period. If you don't some segment of the "users" will consume more than their "share" of the available bandwidth.

    You also have to protect people from having their applications completely broken by network management. What does broken mean? It DOESN'T mean I don't get my full download bandwidth from my P2P application all the time, whenever I want it. It DOES mean that my application mysteriously fails and can't recover.

    Comparing the network to the road system, however, is a bad analogy. I can't get in my car and drive 20 copies of it down the road. In other words, there is a physical limit to my usage of bandwidth on the freeway. Why not on the internet?
    hornerea
  • RE: No Government rules on packet throttling, blocking, colleague says on C

    yeah I think the answer is simple too. If the telcoms don't want to honor 'unlimited' bandwidth internet connections then they should stop selling them. Put PER-USER caps in place, and charge more.

    But the net must remain neutral to protocols and applications. It should NOT matter what apps you are running. If the net doesn't stay neutral it will be very bad for the future. Imagine you are some developer with a killer new app.. will you have to submit a proposal to your regional telcos to test it? 'dear comcast office of throttling, please see attached proposal. I would like to request 30 days of high priority traffic for TCP port 8008 on your network so that we can test a new application...'
    bullshit_z@...
  • RE: No Government rules on packet throttling, blocking, colleague says on Capitol Hill

    This week-end, after an "upgrade" by Time Warner cable, my internet access is working fine but by ATT Callvantage service, which uses specific UDP ports, is not. After countless hours on the phone, it's clear the problem is not a hardware one but a network issues. ATT claims, and they've seen this before, that Time Warner is now blocking the UDP ports I need for my phone. There is no way that ISP's should have the right, unilaterally, to close of ports needed by third party VOIP providers. I no longer have a working phone and cannot call 911. I feel as if my phone has been hijacked - with no warning and that it's an abuse of their monopoly position as a cable provider where I live. Now I have to go about proving this, but in the meantime, I will be forced to go back to my landline from Verizon, which costs almost twice as much and has less features. This MUST be regulated. Critical services like VOIP are being used on networks. Our phone usage was pretty minimal, we have never abused our network in any way. This has made me fighting mad.
    gwiggins@...
  • Clash of two mandates

    Universal access vs net neutrality. If all packets are equal, then the cost for rural access would be 2-3 times more. Maybe universal access should be thrown out in areas where wireless coverage suffices.
    3dguru
  • RE: No Government rules on packet throttling, blocking, colleague says on Capitol Hill

    It seems to be good solution
    http://voipsipsdk.com/Download.aspx
    it.ragester