From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-oo1-xc32.google.com (mail-oo1-xc32.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::c32]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 950A93B2A4 for ; Tue, 17 Oct 2023 13:14:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-oo1-xc32.google.com with SMTP id 006d021491bc7-57b5ef5b947so3893959eaf.0 for ; Tue, 17 Oct 2023 10:14:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1697562879; x=1698167679; darn=lists.bufferbloat.net; h=references:to:cc:in-reply-to:date:subject:mime-version:message-id :from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=raPtPeXaHJA0w1zHxSPmjfd2HveUNIE7Glj++lmUXwY=; b=GqpKV0Y6R7UwYW6X8zPGSHP6khQ4/QjfJiU3hTlfOICxlmRoMRC8uMZS9y78Yn34mQ o42ZbDMTyVGlMGmyPYrwl3rBbq2sRLgC307st7/lKBuNuAHXt+6CgvZBr/293v+PBFzO mbfcYPpyvuryoimuJ+QBeBLxnFo8n6fBjSYK4XnHs7Cd2zvzX5EIP0fZgfMAjkFs9lo8 nlRrjIUrjyl4LWPeN9kF7QtVIA25FS1i8X2+QSXTTujZ7Zeiv7cdMb3+yPUPBcSbcK4i igDO30+v7QlVd0h5PRw2JC/6WXmNt93Ody4XNC3QmPI0gzKhjQDVmtw3OSvcX0McXgg8 uazA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1697562879; x=1698167679; h=references:to:cc:in-reply-to:date:subject:mime-version:message-id :from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=raPtPeXaHJA0w1zHxSPmjfd2HveUNIE7Glj++lmUXwY=; b=q7oiU+DOfXfXNdmgHQGSYd9vcNQC789heE70/5w2L2RV/gpDjHAS5cM5I3PzRTYBbk Qc/qAZ8C0pDg88c0ryhKkVEdYnjzQwZlRpmr0qZoKziTrp2/6BljHRCwjtbBPE+ghEei T9DrnGnqtVLuLNh61hHyoh/8nHiEQYfkmDHjrW9a/NoJP3QJkqOAdan6BuNMNXYonN7z I8/s83uXIAlrJxwizn0xR1JCQ7StItlIGtGzq9YD0OG3UStye7PFeLGCLdJbfXuC7Zrj kFwrZ7ElmtNdWDBHWl89PBTS4+dCvTOsb+hSbqsKUFPYKyrbAYYZon2CKioY+czwRZ5t iUFw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxM0LrWKCVYsCUvZCKVZ+Gi30owxKR7yZLLQ0JLDBg7GMn/x8d9 bEKEsGmOPcFMYE9rmjAA9fQuEmhIeag= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGIMia/3s2Hnw6ACj80b/sBxIH7v0/h92V2EWjCxYX+qU3cnlvZT2XTON3hE6oFJl7Dx6KwfQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6359:2ea3:b0:166:cae0:6e19 with SMTP id rp35-20020a0563592ea300b00166cae06e19mr3135227rwb.3.1697562879080; Tue, 17 Oct 2023 10:14:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtpclient.apple ([2601:603:4881:6e20:e032:cb75:ba3e:35f1]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a5-20020aa79705000000b006b5922221f4sm1707450pfg.8.2023.10.17.10.14.38 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 17 Oct 2023 10:14:38 -0700 (PDT) From: Spencer Sevilla Message-Id: <3BFAD7AD-F7F7-42CF-960F-421628BA357A@gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_E456EAB3-FA26-4584-A094-5F7C34246A95" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3731.700.6\)) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2023 10:14:27 -0700 In-Reply-To: To: =?utf-8?Q?Network_Neutrality_is_back!_Let=C2=B4s_make_the_technical_as?= =?utf-8?Q?pects_heard_this_time!?= References: <7FAB46F4-EA85-446F-BCC0-B79C03E0C11D@comcast.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3731.700.6) Subject: Re: [NNagain] Small ISP Carve Out X-BeenThere: nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: =?utf-8?q?Network_Neutrality_is_back!_Let=C2=B4s_make_the_technical_aspects_heard_this_time!?= List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2023 17:14:40 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_E456EAB3-FA26-4584-A094-5F7C34246A95 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Yeah, I=E2=80=99m split on this. I do generally like the take of =E2=80=9C= laws for ISPs should apply equally to all ISPs=E2=80=9D but two valid = and very different reasons immediately came to mind for taking size into = account. 1: Performance. I=E2=80=99ve supported some *very* backhaul constrained = networks, and you quickly start looking for any possible way to improve = the customer experience, even if it means prioritizing popular sites or = traffic flows over others. Prioritizing common stuff (like WhatsApp and = Youtube in our case) is a concrete way to make people happier, even if = it kills you inside. This relates closely to your lower paragraph and = (perhaps) WISPA=E2=80=99s silence. 2: Monopolistic concerns. As ISPs get larger, so does their ability to = exert pressure on other markets. The Comcast-Netflix shakedown way back = in the day immediately comes to mind as an example. If regulators want = to curb this behavior, then really they only need to be looking at the = players big enough to do that. Maybe Netflix (or other big content drivers) could almost serve as a = bellwether here. In the first example, I know some small ISPs that = literally go out of their way to prioritize Netflix traffic, whereas in = the second it=E2=80=99s the opposite. If we were to divide ISPs into = =E2=80=9Csmall=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9Cbig=E2=80=9D for this purpose = (obviously a hard exercise), a convenient line in the sand would be = =E2=80=9Care you shaking websites down or is it going the other way?=E2=80= =9D Obviously these two contexts/lenses are quite different, and kinda = reduce to a more abstract question. Are the regulator's goals related to = performance? Consumer protection? Antitrust? Ideology? Politics? When it comes to my own personal values, I=E2=80=99m not worried about = case #1 because it=E2=80=99s simply an optimization that chases popular = content and doesn=E2=80=99t really drive change at scale, whereas a = hypothetical Tier 1 ISP could absolutely be able to strike a backdoor = deal and hamstring one content provider in favor of another. I suppose = another reframing of the above question would be, if consumers notice a = content website is struggling, is their first thought =E2=80=9Cwow, = $localisp sucks, I should go back to $majorisp=E2=80=9D or is it =E2=80=9C= wow, $contentprovider is really struggling, we should watch something = else tonight.=E2=80=9D > On Oct 17, 2023, at 09:42, Jeremy Austin via Nnagain = wrote: >=20 > IMO the argument in seeking additional forbearance is that if all = ISPs, no matter the size, have a similar minimum burden of regulatory = filing and that burden is large, it acts as a barrier to entry. In a = perfect world the rules can apply to all sizes of ISPs *and* not be = burdensome. >=20 > To keep this on topic, why is Title II (the burden WISPA rejects, not = necessarily the Net Neutrality goals TII espouses) the only way to = achieve NN? >=20 > On a related note, I observe that neither WISPA nor NTCA have weighed = in on neutrality per se. When I spoke to David Zumwalt last week in = Vegas (current WISPA President/CEO) he was surprised to hear that there = are ISPs and vendors active in the wireless and small fiber provider = markets that are actively advocating for, selling and deploying = non-net-neutral traffic management solutions. Perhaps WISPA is avoiding = taking a stance on pure NN ideals. >=20 > $boilerplate not necessarily the opinions of my employer and/or = ancestors, > Jeremy >=20 > On Tue, Oct 17, 2023 at 6:45=E2=80=AFAM Livingood, Jason via Nnagain = > = wrote: >> =E2=80=9CSmall Broadband Providers Urge FCC to Leave Them Out of Some = Net Neutrality Rules=E2=80=9D See = https://broadbandbreakfast.com/2023/10/small-broadband-providers-urge-fcc-= to-leave-them-out-of-some-net-neutrality-rules/. My personal opinion is = any rules should apply to all providers. After all, my locally-owned = small car mechanic does not get to opt out of EPA rules for used motor = oil disposal since they are small and have 4 employees and small organic = farms don=E2=80=99t get to opt out of food safety rules or labeling. >>=20 >> =20 >>=20 >> JL >>=20 >> =20 >>=20 >> =20 >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> Nnagain mailing list >> Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain >=20 >=20 > --=20 > -- > Jeremy Austin > Sr. Product Manager > Preseem | Aterlo Networks > preseem.com >=20 > Book a Call: https://app.hubspot.com/meetings/jeremy548 > Phone: 1-833-733-7336 x718 > Email: jeremy@preseem.com >=20 > Stay Connected with Newsletters & More: = https://preseem.com/stay-connected/ > _______________________________________________ > Nnagain mailing list > Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain --Apple-Mail=_E456EAB3-FA26-4584-A094-5F7C34246A95 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Yeah, = I=E2=80=99m split on this. I do generally like the take of =E2=80=9Claws = for ISPs should apply equally to all ISPs=E2=80=9D but two valid and = very different reasons immediately came to mind for taking size into = account.

1: Performance. I=E2=80=99ve supported = some *very* backhaul constrained networks, and you quickly start looking = for any possible way to improve the customer experience, even if it = means prioritizing popular sites or traffic flows over others. = Prioritizing common stuff (like WhatsApp and Youtube in our case) is a = concrete way to make people happier, even if it kills you inside. This = relates closely to your lower paragraph and (perhaps) WISPA=E2=80=99s = silence.

2: Monopolistic concerns. As ISPs get = larger, so does their ability to exert pressure on other markets. The = Comcast-Netflix shakedown way back in the day immediately comes to mind = as an example. If regulators want to curb this behavior, then really = they only need to be looking at the players big enough to do = that.

Maybe Netflix (or other big content = drivers) could almost serve as a bellwether here. In the first example, = I know some small ISPs that literally go out of their way to prioritize = Netflix traffic, whereas in the second it=E2=80=99s the opposite. If we = were to divide ISPs into =E2=80=9Csmall=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9Cbig=E2=80=9D= for this purpose (obviously a hard exercise), a convenient line in the = sand would be =E2=80=9Care you shaking websites down or is it going the = other way?=E2=80=9D

Obviously these two = contexts/lenses are quite different, and kinda reduce to a more abstract = question. Are the regulator's goals related to performance? Consumer = protection? Antitrust? Ideology? Politics?

When = it comes to my own personal values, I=E2=80=99m not worried about case = #1 because it=E2=80=99s simply an optimization that chases popular = content and doesn=E2=80=99t really drive change at scale, whereas a = hypothetical Tier 1 ISP could absolutely be able to strike a backdoor = deal and hamstring one content provider in favor of another. I suppose = another reframing of the above question would be, if consumers notice a = content website is struggling, is their first thought =E2=80=9Cwow, = $localisp sucks, I should go back to $majorisp=E2=80=9D or is it =E2=80=9C= wow, $contentprovider is really struggling, we should watch something = else tonight.=E2=80=9D

On Oct 17, 2023, at 09:42, Jeremy Austin via Nnagain = <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:

IMO the = argument in seeking additional forbearance is that if all ISPs, no = matter the size, have a similar minimum burden of regulatory filing and = that burden is large, it acts as a barrier to entry. In a perfect world = the rules can apply to all sizes of ISPs *and* not be = burdensome.

To keep this on topic, why is Title II = (the burden WISPA rejects, not necessarily the Net Neutrality goals TII = espouses) the only way to achieve NN?

On a = related note, I observe that neither WISPA nor NTCA have weighed in on = neutrality per se. When I spoke to David Zumwalt last week in Vegas = (current WISPA President/CEO) he was surprised to hear that there are = ISPs and vendors active in the wireless and small fiber provider markets = that are actively advocating for, selling and deploying non-net-neutral = traffic management solutions. Perhaps WISPA is avoiding taking a stance = on pure NN ideals.

$boilerplate not necessarily = the opinions of my employer and/or = ancestors,
Jeremy

On Tue, Oct 17, 2023 at 6:45=E2=80=AFAM = Livingood, Jason via Nnagain <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.ne= t> wrote:

=E2=80=9CSmall = Broadband Providers Urge FCC to Leave Them Out of Some Net Neutrality = Rules=E2=80=9D See = https://broadbandbreakfast.com/2023/10/small-broadband-providers-urge-fcc-= to-leave-them-out-of-some-net-neutrality-rules/. My personal opinion = is any rules should apply to all providers. After all, my locally-owned = small car mechanic does not get to opt out of EPA rules for used motor oil disposal since they are small and = have 4 employees and small organic farms don=E2=80=99t get to opt out of = food safety rules or labeling.

 

JL

 

 

_______________________________________________
Nnagain mailing list
Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain


--
--
Jeremy = Austin
Sr. Product Manager
Preseem | Aterlo = Networks

Phone: 1-833-733-7336 x718

Stay Connected with Newsletters & More: https://preseem.com/stay-connected/
=
_______________________________________________
Nnagain mailing = list
Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/lis= tinfo/nnagain

= --Apple-Mail=_E456EAB3-FA26-4584-A094-5F7C34246A95--