[Chapter-delegates] News from the front
Franck Martin
franck at sopac.org
Fri Jun 9 14:28:35 PDT 2006
From my experience here in the Pacific I'd like to see ISPs "obliged"
to offer at least a volume free, unfiltered connection limited only by
the access speed at whatever price they like.
A lot of countries here have only volume based plans, they look cheap,
but are not in fact and then the end point struggle to limit their
bandwidth by disallowing most of their users to do anything. They are
also therefore encouraged not to publish any content on the web locally.
Yes you have internet but you should not use it.
In general I prefer ISPs to not filter any IP datagram but have AUP to
allow them to terminate end points, at least talk to them first so they
have a chance to fix the situation (remove viruses, stop spam, remove
content,...). ISPs would need agreements when they interconnect so that
they know the other ISPs enforce adequate AUPs with their users too
(promiss to investigate and provide a reply).
Other than that it seems to me they can do anything they want and the
market will decide.
I also wonder about NetNeutrality and mobile phones. There was a
"forecast" from Bruce Perens which was something like: The new
generation of mobile phones will take off when the mobile providers
realise they are not content providers.
Cheers
Fred Baker wrote:
> There is not currently a regulatory authority for the Internet. The
> ITU periodically applies for the job, and some issues have been
> discussed there.
>
> I'm not sure what "definition of the Internet" you are referring to.
> My working definition of the Internet is "anywhere IP datagrams might
> go". If it is something about routing and services, do corporate
> firewalls break the Internet model? Some would say that they do. But
> prior to commercial deployment, the Internet in most cases had what
> were referred to as "Acceptable Use Policies" or AUPs, which said "if
> you are using my network, it is targeted for <something in
> particular> and we don't expect you to <do something else>". These
> were often of an academic nature, and precluded content that was
> considered illegal or detrimental to education. The NRENs do the same
> thing today - for one example, see http://
> informns.demo.ties.k12.mn.us/sites/8b8b7c58-f0c8-442a-9610-
> e26539e2cf7b/uploads/AUPmnI2.pdf. Commercial networks often do the
> same as well: I use Cox Business Services from my home, because I use
> a VPN to "go to" work and Cox's commodity home network in its AUP
> precludes VPN traffic. This is to say that a service is available to
> me to do anything I want, but not all services available to me permit
> me to do all things, and I don't see a problem with that as long as
> there is in fact an affordable service available to me that does what
> I need done. Coming back to corporate firewalls, as you will note
> from my email address, I work for a company named Cisco Systems.
> Cisco drops about 70% of email arriving at the corporate firewall,
> they tell me. This is based on one of two systems: a reputation based
> service that attempts to isolate active bots and not accept SMTP
> connections from them, and another service that compares email we do
> receive to known patterns and marks traffic that appears to be spam
> or virus traffic. In addition, on my laptop, I run a Baysian filter
> that further interdicts spam load. Would you argue that services that
> reduce the spam load and protect corporate or private assets from
> being subverted or attacked break the Internet model? I'm not of that
> opinion - speaking for myself.
>
> When it comes to applications "hogging" peers, if it's not attack
> traffic, then I imagine you are referring to either Internet Video or
> peer-to-peer file sharing; I would be very surprised to find voice
> being limited for other than competitive reasons. I should think that
> it is within the rights of an ISP to charge a customer for usage
> beyond some threshold or in some way to limit them to some rate. For
> example, it might sell tiers of service - for a low price or maybe
> even for free, it offers a few hundreds of kilobits per second, for a
> stated price it offers more, and for yet another price it offers a
> lot more. In the latter, it might use concepts from ftp://ftp.isi.edu/
> in-notes/rfc2597.txt, in which is marks some traffic as in excess of
> some capacity threshold and targets that as "what to drop first".
> Many ISPs give you free access to their web caches but charge some
> fee for traffic that goes off-net. In the present Net Neutrality
> debate in the US, I don't think that an ISP is required to give
> premium service absent a contract to give premium service, but that
> it might give premium service to its own servers and standard (the
> same as it gives everyone) service to services outside of its
> network. That's not intentionally harming the other services, but it
> also means that it only helps services that it has an appropriate
> contract with.
>
> Am I making sense?
>
> On Jun 9, 2006, at 5:36 AM, ISOC wrote:
>
>> Fred:
>>
>> Im not saying we should not give infinite bandwidth, but to
>> applications hogging the overall performance of peers due to which
>> massive multimillion dollar networks are being rolled out even in
>> the US should be excercised a ROT/ROF. Applications like example
>> SKYPE / SIP / VOIP which are also affecting worldwide telcos. It is
>> true that if we limit any application , the definition of Internet
>> would not be the same but with Global emerging peers having their
>> policies regulated by their authorities the debate has risen to
>> disallow many types of traffic. The idea to support ROT/ROF (Right
>> of Tranport / Right of Flow) could create a total convergence of
>> Telecom to Internet as it would be adding value to the existent idea
>> of the Internet.
>>
>> I have a question, if my local ISP disallows some kind of traffic or
>> the National Peering Network, Internet loses its definitions but it
>> is a concern which is still within a grey area, is there any global
>> authority which can re-regulate in such an event.
>>
>> Your comments please?
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Fred Baker" <fred at cisco.com>
>> To: "Franck Martin" <franck at sopac.org>
>> Cc: "isoc Chapter Delegates" <chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org>
>> Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 4:57 AM
>> Subject: Re: [Chapter-delegates] News from the front
>>
>>
>>> I'm not sure what your point is. The first says that broadband is a
>>> bad thing and the chairman of the local ISOC chapter says we
>>> shouldn't be giving people infinite bandwidth. The second says that
>>> broadband is not only a good thing but South Africa's economic future
>>> depends on it.
>>>
>>> Keep talking?
>>>
>>> On Jun 8, 2006, at 4:16 PM, Franck Martin wrote:
>>>
>>>> http://www.gulf-daily-news.com/Story.asp?
>>>> Article=145685&Sn=BNEW&IssueID=29080
>>>> Cut-price Internet
>>>> <http://www.gulf-daily-news.com/Story.asp?
>>>> Article=145685&Sn=BNEW&IssueID=29080>
>>>> Gulf Daily News - Manama,Bahrain
>>>> *...* Referring to Batelco's new Internet packages, which limit
>>>> usage to
>>>> certain thresholds of up to 15GB, Bahrain *Internet* *Society*
>>>> chairman
>>>> Ahmed Al Hujairy said it *...
>>>>
>>>> *http://www.capeargus.co.za/index.php?
>>>> fSectionId=498&fArticleId=3282874
>>>> Sever the bonds of broadband access - or SA will pay a heavy price
>>>> <http://www.capeargus.co.za/index.php?
>>>> fSectionId=498&fArticleId=3282874>
>>>> Cape Argus (subscription) - Cape Town,South Africa
>>>> *...* Alan Levin is a specialist in change management and
>>>> organisational
>>>> governance and chairman of the *Internet* *Society* of South
>>>> Africa. *...*
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Franck Martin
>>>> ICT Specialist
>>>> franck at sopac.org
>>>> SOPAC, Fiji
>>>> GPG Key fingerprint = 44A4 8AE4 392A 3B92 FDF9 D9C6 BE79 9E60 81D9
>>>> 1320
>>>> "Toute connaissance est une reponse a une question" G.Bachelard
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Chapter-delegates mailing list
>>>> Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
>>>> http://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Chapter-delegates mailing list
>>> Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
>>> http://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
>>>
>>>
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Franck Martin
franck at sopac.org
"Toute connaissance est une réponse à une question"
G. Bachelard
More information about the Chapter-delegates
mailing list