[Chapter-delegates] net neutrality vs DNS redirection

[Franck Martin]

Many applications work on the presumption that some domains do not
exist. Take anti-spam measure, if you receive an e-mail and your
software checks the domain and find something, then it may consider it
is all good.

There is no problem for the  web browser, to suggest you alternatives
(you installed the web browser and configured it the way you like), but
for the network operator to have a deep look in your traffic and start
to modify it, this is what we are against. Next step is to intercept
ads, and replace them with the ISP own ads (there are some software that
already do that, see Scott Bradner column). Then the ISP can for
instance insert ads in your chat messages, emails, etc...

So we need to make a stand now.

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



Narelle Clark wrote:
>> Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2008 21:57:11 +0200
>> From: Patrick Vande Walle <patrick at vande-walle.eu>
>>
>> http://www.digitalhome.ca/content/view/2689/206/
>>
>> In what appears to be a violation of Net Neutrality by Rogers
>> Cable, Digital Home readers are reporting that Rogers High
>> Speed Internet service has begun redirecting customers
>> "Server not found pages" to webpages laden with Rogers advertising.
>>     
>
> Without commenting specifically on what Rogers are doing, can we perhaps consider the principles here?
>
> I do not understand how is this a 'net neutrality' issue?
>
> To my thinking, if the ISP *still conveys* the message that the requested named service (ie DNS request) was 'not found', or 'not answering' then why not supply a bunch of other potentially helpful responses? And get someone else to pay for them?
>
> The issue that most ISPs are facing is that pipes to a consumer's door are increasingly expensive to provide, expectations of service perrformance are increasing greatly , but the rates of payment are getting lower and lower. Google, Yahoo, MSN and others have proved that sources of funding from advertising can cover much of a service provider's overall bills, hence leading to potentially lower direct costs to the end consumer.
>
> If Google et al can provide advertising alongside its search outputs, why can't an ISP? Surely the principles are that it be:
> - clearly delineated from the original request
> - not impeding the use of the Internet service, eg by excessively slowing it down
> - not misleading, eg by preventing genuine access where the requested service IS really available
>
> I really can't see that this is a net neutrality issue at all.
>
> If I go to a bookshop asking for a certain book, which they don't have, is it inappropriate for the bookshop owner to suggest another of the same type, even for a fee? If I go to a shopping centre and the shop I want has closed, is it inappropriate for the shop next door to put a sign in the walkway saying they have similar services?
>
> To my thinking, it would be a net neutrality issue if all IP traffic to 'domain name X' were redirected to 'domain name Y' after a fee paid to, or other arrangement made with, the intermediate service provider **WITHOUT** the customers' consent. Even with the customers' consent it could well be problematic under misuse of market power, or restraint of trade principles/legislation.
>
> Like I said, I can't see that this is a net neutrality issue.
>
> Which brings me to...
>   
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20080722/f19ca532/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20080722/f19ca532/attachment.asc>