I am an advocate of competition and better access to spectrum for use by the public. The Super Wi-Fi event I help run (though just about everyone else has abandoned that term) is intended to highlight the possibilities of self-directed spectrum through spectrum sharing and databases (or, in other words, more access via more pathways), and I fully believe that if we open up to general use we will realize more and greater benefit. Some friends would call that a free market position.
All of that said, I find myself on the other side of the great debate about Net Neutrality. More specifically, I am disgusted with the media for dragging out lots of interviewees who have nothing substantive to say. These empty talking heads talk about the power of Comcast (AT&T should be grateful that Comcast is now the Bobby Heenan of communications companies) and then they blame the FCC for failing to keep the monopolists in check. Turn the channel and you hear a different angle, but it’s the same “Beware the Boogeyman in your Utility Closet.”
So, what’s my beef?
First, let’s set the record straight. It is the courts that have made necessary the redefinition of Net Neutrality. This is not an activist chair looking to make carriers happy, but an FCC that can’t find a path that is not blocked by some rulings or lawsuits waiting in the wings. Accordingly, the FCC finds itself having to rethink how it talks about Net Neutrality.
Second, the entire world (including many of my IETF friends) are claiming that Comcast will somehow deliberately degrade service without checks and balances, while ignoring the history of the Internet’s peering model...Read More
By 
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar