Author: RB

Here are some of the jewels among the comments submitted to the FCC on Save the Internet’s hilariously silly petition opposing sensible network management practices.

Brett Glass, the operator of a wireless ISP in Wyoming, points out that Saving the Internet would put him out of business and his customers off the net.

Rob Atkinson of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation explains a bit about networking in general and DOCSIS in particular.

Comcast slams its clueless critics in a forceful and detailed response.

Competitive Enterprise Institute advocates market solutions.

Jerry Brito of the Mercatus Center reminds the Commission of the framework around new rules.

AT&T comments in support of rationality:

Some net neutrality proponents urge the Commission to preserve what they view as “the fundamental idea on the Internet since its inception . . . that every Web site, every feature, and every service should be treated exactly the same.” But this “dumb pipes” vision of the Internet is irresponsible nonsense. Some real-time Internet applications—such as video, voice, and telemedicine—have a much greater need for high service quality than other applications, such as ordinary e-mail. The Internet’s constituent networks can satisfy consumer needs only by treating such applications differently.

Verizon lays out the dollars and options:

Investing nearly $23 billion, Verizon has led the charge in fiber deployment and now makes its fiber-to-the-premises network (FiOS) available to 6.8 million homes and businesses, with plans to pass 18 million homes and businesses with FiOS by the end of 2010. Verizon’s investments are prompting competitors – such as the cable companies and other broadband providers – to respond, which has benefited consumers with lower prices and increased speed and quality. Competitive alternatives include 3G mobile wireless, fixed wireless/WiMAX, WiFi, broadband over powerline, and satellite. Verizon Wireless’s 3G technology, for example, now reaches 242 major United States cities with a total population of more than 200 million people.

George Ou gets down with the technical issues, and illustrates the key point.

Hands off the Internet joins the fray.

Progress and Freedom manages the demand glut.

Save the Internet isn’t wearing any clothes.

Peter Svensson, the AP reporter last seen carrying water for the EFF, has a new piece out on the bandwidth shortage:

Internet service providers and consumer advocates agree that some form of network management, also called “traffic shaping,” can be good for everybody. Not all Internet traffic has the same level of urgency. It makes sense for the service providers to give priority to a voice call, which needs a steady stream of quickly delivered data, over a movie download.

This is unusual territory for telecommunications providers — in the old telephone network, some phone calls aren’t generally prioritized over others. Prioritization makes the Internet more like the postal system, where you pay for delivery speed and quality of service.

Indeed, one the major problems with Internet regulation is the tendency of the consumer lobby to insist it act like the old telephone network. If the only tool you have is a telecom regulation, every computer looks like a phone. But on the Internet and its access networks, every user competes with every other use for Quality of Service, and that’s why we need traffic shaping and other forms of QoS.

Check out the latest Tech Policy Weekly podcast, Network Management Redux:

Two networking / IT experts join us for the podcast this week to discuss the ramifications of potential government regulation of broadband network engineering issues. The experts are Matt Sherman, a San Francisco Bay Area web developer and a technology policy blogger who blogs at RichVsReach.com, and George Ou who is the Technical Director of ZDNet, and is a former IT consultant specializing in Internet engineering and IT infrastructure and architecture issues. Also on the show are Adam Thierer of the Progress and Freedom Foundation, Jerry Brito of the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, and Tim Lee of the Cato Institute.

It’s a frank and lively discussion of broadband policy from several points of view.

Brilliance on Google’s crocodile tears about Microsoft’s takeover of Yahoo! from The Secret Diary of Steve Jobs:

This is Google’s favorite song. They sing it whenever they want to get their way. Whether the issue is net neutrality, or the bid for wireless spectrum, or now this — these guys do their best Eddie Haskell impersonation and look everyone straight in the eye and say it’s not that they’re concerned about their stock price or their revenue growth, it’s that they’re concerned about users, because gee whiz these evil guys who are opposing our efforts could really mess things up for everyone. The Google guys are the good guys, see? They’re the ones who put the needs of Internet users first. The amazing thing to me is that so many people believe this bullshit.

Ahem and indeed.

Some 28,000 public comments have already been posted to the FCC on the Comcast petition, and Save The Internet! is urging members to file more.

This is taking on the character of a DOS attack, as most of the comments are junk. Telling the FCC that you love the Internet is nice, but’s not exactly relevant to this enquiry. How will the non-junk comments get to the attention of the examiners?

But that’s the whole point.