From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-yw1-x1135.google.com (mail-yw1-x1135.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1135]) (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 647D83B2A4 for ; Tue, 17 Oct 2023 12:42:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-yw1-x1135.google.com with SMTP id 00721157ae682-5a81ab75f21so56125477b3.2 for ; Tue, 17 Oct 2023 09:42:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=aterlo.com; s=google; t=1697560941; x=1698165741; darn=lists.bufferbloat.net; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=2NakFaJRvVMp7QJB3lxmN9Mf2rW7fCYHoYM3w3YXMwg=; b=Xoyze+taRIh1FkO0cs5bX9rztw+jmiPTcu8reX98FsOX4lL04aKLq0mrZKVhTWOrgL 8C2Btit1/i1DnjzIHqjShXEToJjZWkqn0ldXQlvS7qwQeEPyNtXjLg1fl+yp61w3rnAd HNpFcN6meXXMghks7p1R9dWjJdoBb+6+fLdfk= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1697560941; x=1698165741; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=2NakFaJRvVMp7QJB3lxmN9Mf2rW7fCYHoYM3w3YXMwg=; b=aW4H2SPPa4SshF/nMMkwwzAA0ZdWRa2XDJZMAaW6b2wuTvN2uNerVWk66BsTNG6Fv1 o4KFSvYiJkeB0hFXgmYofNUyLCj8kThxOPjaRLiZ7cfSghHcWPad74rw2NUaA3aNMbC2 Ajr7KYlxm1t1H2gTndr98vB2MbQIUZ9ME/4KLN47PS4lJNmpcPORd5zxgF8suiFQDhL8 c+tRkqOJ30SZLOqTFe3ukDETxYYeNNPA9gIR42boijPKdBRBjYyHVcYzuHxnZGGEhNFn C2dCBTlAUjLmjhXZKeZB19pXRc6RqYRmxNca7E7o95EF2aemvZPj93ofUzCPtEMO5YZ1 9Idg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwuOJc/Li7l7nG0WA8xp758iARU5R2o3uMCdzWW0074NyRtInHg f8ZoyRMurLXxve8ixvJMOHkftjlErpF/XDUwZ+lm3HD8gZtXfDaoOvE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFzemmwOumnO3tVzu201qFX7W3FuP00ARtXjxWXkJwgllfAYHlrLnKbdvY9GxuZwkWEhpt3mf2MEE4pnmXw2+U= X-Received: by 2002:a25:abab:0:b0:d9a:dfd2:cce4 with SMTP id v40-20020a25abab000000b00d9adfd2cce4mr2982593ybi.55.1697560941412; Tue, 17 Oct 2023 09:42:21 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <7FAB46F4-EA85-446F-BCC0-B79C03E0C11D@comcast.com> In-Reply-To: <7FAB46F4-EA85-446F-BCC0-B79C03E0C11D@comcast.com> From: Jeremy Austin Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2023 08:42:10 -0800 Message-ID: To: =?UTF-8?Q?Network_Neutrality_is_back=21_Let=C2=B4s_make_the_technical_asp?= =?UTF-8?Q?ects_heard_this_time=21?= Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000e5da6f0607ec3444" 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 16:42:22 -0000 --000000000000e5da6f0607ec3444 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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.net> 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 > --=20 -- Jeremy Austin Sr. Product Manager Preseem | Aterlo Networks preseem.com Book a Call: https://app.hubspot.com/meetings/jeremy548 Phone: 1-833-733-7336 x718 Email: jeremy@preseem.com Stay Connected with Newsletters & More: *https://preseem.com/stay-connected/* --000000000000e5da6f0607ec3444 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
IMO the argument in seeking additional forbearance is that= if all ISPs, no matter the size, have a similar minimum burden of regulato= ry filing and that burden is large, it acts as a barrier to entry. In a per= fect 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 WIS= PA rejects, not necessarily the Net Neutrality goals TII espouses) the only= way to achieve NN?

On a related note, I observe t= hat neither WISPA nor NTCA have weighed in on neutrality per se. When I spo= ke 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 a= nd small fiber provider markets that are actively advocating for, selling a= nd deploying non-net-neutral traffic management solutions. Perhaps WISPA is= avoiding taking a stance on pure NN ideals.

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

On Tue, Oct 17, 2023 at 6:45=E2=80=AFAM Livingood, Jason v= ia Nnagain <nnagain@lis= ts.bufferbloat.net> wrote:

=E2=80=9CSmall Broadb= and 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-t= o-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 s= afety rules or labeling.

=C2=A0<= /span>

JL

=C2=A0<= /span>

=C2=A0<= /span>

_______________________________________________
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:=C2=A0https://preseem.com/stay-co= nnected/
--000000000000e5da6f0607ec3444--