4 ms·

One thing I don't get is, what would be wrong if Verizon decided to prioritize VoIP packets as a group. That's a good thing. What about video content, also a go

by nkassis 16y ago

One thing I don't get is, what would be wrong if Verizon decided to prioritize VoIP packets as a group. That's a good thing. What about video content, also a good thing. These are the things that Google I believe is talking about in the exceptions. That is not to say Verizon would do any of this properly but I still thing net neutrality must take into consideration that not all internet traffic have the same needs.

anamax 16y ago
> I still thing net neutrality must take into consideration that not all internet traffic have the same needs. How do you know the needs of different internet traffic? For example, how do you know that a given video stream "needs" higher priority than a given of e-mail? Yes, I'm aware that video is disrupted by jitter and e-mail isn't, but that doesn't tell you anything about the "needs" of specific content. For example, do you really think that chatroulette "needs" priority over e-mail telling someone how to defuse a bomb?
- mishmash 16y ago
  Exactly, my cable ISP is Cox and they have been traffic shaping for years. That means my neighbor's PornTube traffic already has priority over my FTP session to a clients server. Its underlying traffic shaping method: at times of congestion, all “time-sensitive” traffic – which it defines to include Web pages, voice calls, streaming video, VPN tunneling and games – would not be delayed. However, less time-sensitive traffic, including FTP transfers, network storage, P2P, software updates and Usenet groups, could be. http://connectedplanetonline.com/residential_services/news/cox-traffic-shaping-method-0128/ http://connectedplanetonline.com/residential_services/news/c...
- Unseelie 16y ago
  In that very framed particular, no. But when its the aggregate of a great many videos, (some of which might be talking about bombs) and the aggregate of emails, emails with lagtimes do not involve the frustration and loss of value that video with lagtime does, and that has to do with the nature of the mediums. Mail is not a call, it is not a direct contact with a person, mail is leaving a message, which the recipient reads when they are available, unlike a call, where the users have made themselves available.
nanairo 16y ago
Personally I'd be very happy to have prioritisation based on they type of data. The point is not that VoIP goes faster than webpages, but that Verizon can make _one_ VoIP faster than competing VoIP. So yeah, I agree that if you talk of type of data "as a group" prioritisation should be allowed. Not sure if the strongest believers of net neutrality are also against this though.

by nkassis 16y ago

anamax 16y ago

> I still thing net neutrality must take into consideration that not all internet traffic have the same needs. How do you know the needs of different internet traffic? For example, how do you know that a given video stream "needs" higher priority than a given of e-mail? Yes, I'm aware that video is disrupted by jitter and e-mail isn't, but that doesn't tell you anything about the "needs" of specific content. For example, do you really think that chatroulette "needs" priority over e-mail telling someone how to defuse a bomb?

mishmash 16y ago
Exactly, my cable ISP is Cox and they have been traffic shaping for years. That means my neighbor's PornTube traffic already has priority over my FTP session to a clients server. Its underlying traffic shaping method: at times of congestion, all “time-sensitive” traffic – which it defines to include Web pages, voice calls, streaming video, VPN tunneling and games – would not be delayed. However, less time-sensitive traffic, including FTP transfers, network storage, P2P, software updates and Usenet groups, could be. http://connectedplanetonline.com/residential_services/news/cox-traffic-shaping-method-0128/ http://connectedplanetonline.com/residential_services/news/c...
Unseelie 16y ago
In that very framed particular, no. But when its the aggregate of a great many videos, (some of which might be talking about bombs) and the aggregate of emails, emails with lagtimes do not involve the frustration and loss of value that video with lagtime does, and that has to do with the nature of the mediums. Mail is not a call, it is not a direct contact with a person, mail is leaving a message, which the recipient reads when they are available, unlike a call, where the users have made themselves available.

nanairo 16y ago

Personally I'd be very happy to have prioritisation based on they type of data. The point is not that VoIP goes faster than webpages, but that Verizon can make _one_ VoIP faster than competing VoIP. So yeah, I agree that if you talk of type of data "as a group" prioritisation should be allowed. Not sure if the strongest believers of net neutrality are also against this though.