3 ms·

> It's my understanding that the ISPs want to rescind the 2015 NN rules so they can offer premium guaranteed/prioritized QoS for specific content types from pre

> It's my understanding that the ISPs want to rescind the 2015 NN rules so they can offer premium guaranteed/prioritized QoS for specific content types from premium partner providers (e.g. real-time applications such as medical/security devices, VoIP, video conferencing, and streaming audio/video). You can't do this with electrons. This is actually allowed under current net neutrality rules. As an ISP I can use QoS to make VoIP more reliable, for example. What I can't do is make one specific VoIP provider more reliable than another. If that's the argument that large ISPs are making then they're not being truthful. I have worked at small ISPs for the last 15 years or so and worked on systems that did these things. FWIW I strongly support net neutrality and I'm especially annoyed with any rhetoric that suggests net neutrality is bad for small ISPs. It's really not.

grahamburger 9y ago
Adding more precision: current net neutrality rules allow for some traffic prioritization if the network is at capacity. When the network is not at capacity, bits flow through at line speed but when a network hits it's capacity queues start to fill up. QoS doesn't do anything until queues start to fill up. So if I'm an ISP and I add QoS rules to prioritize VoIP over browsing traffic so that when the network gets congested VoIP calls don't drop (at the expense of web browsing speed) then that's ok - as long as I'm not artificially slowing things down and as long as I'm not prioritizing one company over another (Vonage over Skype, for example.) Removing net neutrality allows ISPs to make deals with VoIP providers (or anyone, really) so that their VoIP always works the best (or even so other VoIP services work poorly or not at all.)
- freedomben 9y ago
  This is a great message to get out as it addresses what I perceive as one of the stronger arguments against NN.

grahamburger 9y ago

Adding more precision: current net neutrality rules allow for some traffic prioritization if the network is at capacity. When the network is not at capacity, bits flow through at line speed but when a network hits it's capacity queues start to fill up. QoS doesn't do anything until queues start to fill up. So if I'm an ISP and I add QoS rules to prioritize VoIP over browsing traffic so that when the network gets congested VoIP calls don't drop (at the expense of web browsing speed) then that's ok - as long as I'm not artificially slowing things down and as long as I'm not prioritizing one company over another (Vonage over Skype, for example.) Removing net neutrality allows ISPs to make deals with VoIP providers (or anyone, really) so that their VoIP always works the best (or even so other VoIP services work poorly or not at all.)

freedomben 9y ago
This is a great message to get out as it addresses what I perceive as one of the stronger arguments against NN.