jm + net-neutrality   4

Net neutrality: EU votes in favour of Internet fast lanes and slow lanes | Ars Technica UK
:(
In the end, sheer political fatigue may have played a major part in undermining net neutrality in the EU. However, the battle is not quite over. As Anne Jellema, CEO of the Web Foundation, which was established by Berners-Lee in 2009, notes in her response to today's EU vote: "The European Parliament is essentially tossing a hot potato to the Body of European Regulators, national regulators and the courts, who will have to decide how these spectacularly unclear rules will be implemented. The onus is now on these groups to heed the call of hundreds of thousands of concerned citizens and prevent a two-speed Internet."
eu  net-neutrality  internet  europe  ep  politics 
october 2015 by jm
Observations of an Internet Middleman
That leaves the remaining six [consumer ISPs peering with Level3] with congestion on almost all of the interconnect ports between us. Congestion that is permanent, has been in place for well over a year and where our peer refuses to augment capacity. They are deliberately harming the service they deliver to their paying customers. They are not allowing us to fulfil the requests their customers make for content. Five of those congested peers are in the United States and one is in Europe. There are none in any other part of the world. All six are large Broadband consumer networks with a dominant or exclusive market share in their local market. In countries or markets where consumers have multiple Broadband choices (like the UK) there are no congested peers.


Amazing that L3 are happy to publish this -- that's where big monopoly ISPs have led their industry.
net-neutrality  networking  internet  level3  congestion  isps  us-politics 
may 2014 by jm
Internet Tolls And The Case For Strong Net Neutrality
Netflix CEO Reed Hastings blogs about the need for Net Neutrality:
Interestingly, there is one special case where no-fee interconnection is embraced by the big ISPs -- when they are connecting among themselves. They argue this is because roughly the same amount of data comes and goes between their networks. But when we ask them if we too would qualify for no-fee interconnect if we changed our service to upload as much data as we download** -- thus filling their upstream networks and nearly doubling our total traffic -- there is an uncomfortable silence. That's because the ISP argument isn't sensible. Big ISPs aren't paying money to services like online backup that generate more upstream than downstream traffic. Data direction, in other words, has nothing to do with costs. ISPs around the world are investing in high-speed Internet and most already practice strong net neutrality. With strong net neutrality, new services requiring high-speed Internet can emerge and become popular, spurring even more demand for the lucrative high-speed packages ISPs offer. With strong net neutrality, everyone avoids the kind of brinkmanship over blackouts that plague the cable industry and harms consumers. As the Wall Street Journal chart shows, we're already getting to the brownout stage. Consumers deserve better.
consumer  net-neutrality  comcast  netflix  protectionism  cartels  isps  us  congestion  capacity 
march 2014 by jm
Why YouTube buffers: The secret deals that make -- and break -- online video
Should ISPs be required to ensure they have sufficient upstream bandwidth to video sites like YouTube and Netflix?
"Verizon has chosen to sell its customers a product [Netflix] that they hope those customers don't actually use," Schaeffer said. "And when customers use it and request movies, they have not ensured there is adequate connectivity to get that video content back to their customers."
netflix  youtube  streaming  video  isps  net-neutrality  peering  comcast  bandwidth  upstream 
july 2013 by jm

Copy this bookmark:



description:


tags: