Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FCC weakens net neutrality rule in a prelude to larger rollbacks

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 322 posts

Re: FCC weakens net neutrality rule in a prelude to larger rollbacks

#21

Post by riskable »

jerkstate wrote: post #16

Does anyone with a strong understanding of internetworking, peering and transit contract negotiation actually believe that "net neutrality" is possible? traffic shaping of saturated links seems like a necessary outcome to not undermine the smaller users (i.e. low bandwidth communications) that are impacted by heavy users (i.e. video streaming) if two peering parties can't come to terms on cost sharing for link upgrad…

Does anyone actually believe we will "run out of bandwidth" to the point where traffic shaping will become essential?

Traffic shaping of saturated links sounds like a waste of time and resources when it's so much easier to just upgrade the hardware. It's cheaper too! It also happens to be the fucking purpose of the ISP (to provide adequate bandwidth for their customers).

Think of how much it costs to pay people to manage an incredibly complicated traffic ruleset--not to mention the massively increased CPU overhead--versus a one-time hardware purchase.

What you're talking about is either an ISP that's dying and can't afford to upgrade their shit or a greedy evil monster that simply wants to extract more profit from existing infrastructure in the most obtuse and invasive way possible.

Re: FCC weakens net neutrality rule in a prelude to larger rollbacks

#22

Post by pmalynin »

jerkstate wrote: post #16

Does anyone with a strong understanding of internetworking, peering and transit contract negotiation actually believe that "net neutrality" is possible? traffic shaping of saturated links seems like a necessary outcome to not undermine the smaller users (i.e. low bandwidth communications) that are impacted by heavy users (i.e. video streaming) if two peering parties can't come to terms on cost sharing for link upgrad…

AFAIK Level3 a few years back offered AT&T to pay and do the upgrade of the links on the AT&Ts side, which they refused.

At this point its blatant monopolistic anti-consumerism.

Re: FCC weakens net neutrality rule in a prelude to larger rollbacks

#24

Post by wmf »

jerkstate wrote: post #16

Does anyone with a strong understanding of internetworking, peering and transit contract negotiation actually believe that "net neutrality" is possible? traffic shaping of saturated links seems like a necessary outcome to not undermine the smaller users (i.e. low bandwidth communications) that are impacted by heavy users (i.e. video streaming) if two peering parties can't come to terms on cost sharing for link upgrad…

Peering and transit links simply shouldn't ever be saturated. If the parties can't come to terms then the government should set the rate at zero (Judgment of Solomon style).

Re: FCC weakens net neutrality rule in a prelude to larger rollbacks

#25

Post by oldrny »

jerkstate wrote: post #16

Does anyone with a strong understanding of internetworking, peering and transit contract negotiation actually believe that "net neutrality" is possible? traffic shaping of saturated links seems like a necessary outcome to not undermine the smaller users (i.e. low bandwidth communications) that are impacted by heavy users (i.e. video streaming) if two peering parties can't come to terms on cost sharing for link upgrad…

Isn't the idea of network neutrality to prevent discriminating between traffic sources, not quantities? I.e. providers can still charge an arm and a leg for heavy users, and allow 'light' users to pay significantly less (maybe based on some non-linear scale?)

Re: FCC weakens net neutrality rule in a prelude to larger rollbacks

#26

Post by throwaway729 »

jerkstate wrote: post #16

Does anyone with a strong understanding of internetworking, peering and transit contract negotiation actually believe that "net neutrality" is possible? traffic shaping of saturated links seems like a necessary outcome to not undermine the smaller users (i.e. low bandwidth communications) that are impacted by heavy users (i.e. video streaming) if two peering parties can't come to terms on cost sharing for link upgrad…

So there's "internetworking, peering and transit contract negotiation", etc.

And then there's "Comcast allowed to bundle internal video streaming platform with bandwidth in order to compete against Netflix"

It's completely trivial for the FCC to allow the former and clamp down hard on the latter.

Re: FCC weakens net neutrality rule in a prelude to larger rollbacks

#28

Post by abootstrapper »

MrZongle2 wrote: post #18
spaced_out wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not going to happen as long as there are at least 40 Republicans in the senate. They used a filibuster to block a moderate Supreme Court nominee, you think they'll even consider allowing an internet reform bill to come to a vote?

How ever did things get made into law in the past? Compromise. Something that neither of the two major parties seem interested in anymore. It is that, not the allocation of seats to a party in Congress, which is why things haven't gotten done.

The Republicans are not interested in compromise. They've pulled the Dems so far right, they're practically center now.

Re: FCC weakens net neutrality rule in a prelude to larger rollbacks

#29

Post by westbywest »

jerkstate wrote: post #16

Does anyone with a strong understanding of internetworking, peering and transit contract negotiation actually believe that "net neutrality" is possible? traffic shaping of saturated links seems like a necessary outcome to not undermine the smaller users (i.e. low bandwidth communications) that are impacted by heavy users (i.e. video streaming) if two peering parties can't come to terms on cost sharing for link upgrad…

There is a difference between shaping traffic to better fit the capacity available, and constricting traffic since you're incentivized to push alternate traffic from a business partner. The latter is what NN advocates are trying to discourage, and it does arguably mess with the 'level playing field' notion.

Re: FCC weakens net neutrality rule in a prelude to larger rollbacks

#30

Post by frgtpsswrdlame »

MrZongle2 wrote: post #18
spaced_out wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not going to happen as long as there are at least 40 Republicans in the senate. They used a filibuster to block a moderate Supreme Court nominee, you think they'll even consider allowing an internet reform bill to come to a vote?

How ever did things get made into law in the past? Compromise. Something that neither of the two major parties seem interested in anymore. It is that, not the allocation of seats to a party in Congress, which is why things haven't gotten done.

Compromise works when there is a good faith effort towards it. That's not what happened during the Obama years.
Post reply on HN