From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qt1-x832.google.com (mail-qt1-x832.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::832]) (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 24C1B3B29D for ; Sun, 1 Oct 2023 14:57:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-qt1-x832.google.com with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-4190890d201so50373791cf.2 for ; Sun, 01 Oct 2023 11:57:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1696186631; x=1696791431; 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=X3UfxpL6ThGd2qAX+vy09FFzKwrVfoUz6M0zB3jg48I=; b=cI9k6Sl8mxmEaxND+VTmOJskZx76D5W3W6ssDCvzAY47P32kueFnNve7No8t3YsbCZ Zpz2/5UKSEHyIGzi1w3HnAEENlcQhrO1N7Ydgg6A4XiFeeZcK7mzbsGhp4uFysj6m4Ba pz0HGBiAwQs+E5zV/VE+cr8PY7pZxAOEIfcoew7h+jHHAmtU1Bm3nEjyRj8E64fFHL0c oUrmpLfddSObwCmGQM+jgiTRIavQN8g65wFqglT0BML1jdaDmlryMvWSpvAepj2nMxqd e2Z5B2mCIgoZ1apLRdBs3Ry/3j/CHt9DrOajMYhJnXnZA1biyIRFajuXqAZ9hVQtidO9 8sdA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1696186631; x=1696791431; 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=X3UfxpL6ThGd2qAX+vy09FFzKwrVfoUz6M0zB3jg48I=; b=m//KWPn2XFV5Ks7A6n0DBFaQt5qE3jcv5sw1B/3e9UG6hb0F/9X7cAsWXdwNy9LhIS BABaKw7T7100UIrf8A8lWi5unF48vjeFJaU+huoe99/ji3rySu63yvwxkx8+0EUJi7Wi Vr51EjlcEyS6/my6M/oLdNTVhnikKHQTnFg5sjLPo7fFODmDVbRVD4uW2roX4rblwWQB V2LB7D5Fi2ewHoZNiMk9942GKvP4vwzhkVJaYNUOT+X3JQXTj4F9DAM4NQZUHbW8pd9b 7kf3rLqVIDElfyn2VeEOH61Hd3Ky3ccXY1dY+441bewYMEl8VuSchSL6i4s3xLHb+xHj uxAg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxOGvvGMbp5C2sA6W63K6QJAOjd69BFR5L3eNZk2Nrn5uf5oTiq ehMCI6IeJsTJ7NRRvrpM1sohEHiz7UffDxcJ+Q46QtMwFgGtcg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGfHa4vepBz5OHf+w1MIKsdM29VboKg1XUcAODbpA2GDkMwTWMvW0ESAPOlmX5Fxmse2IlseFcvMle3fzjP7Os= X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5912:0:b0:418:1fa1:4be3 with SMTP id 18-20020ac85912000000b004181fa14be3mr10874981qty.47.1696186631322; Sun, 01 Oct 2023 11:57:11 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Frantisek Borsik Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2023 20:56:35 +0200 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="000000000000a200a20606ac3997" Subject: Re: [NNagain] Some backstory on the nn-again mailing list 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: Sun, 01 Oct 2023 18:57:12 -0000 --000000000000a200a20606ac3997 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable OK, so I will bite the bullet! I have invited Ajit Pai and Martin Geddes to join us here and let's see if they still have some time and/or even stomach for current round of NN discussion. Anyway, here is my bullet.* I will argue with Martin, that - Net Neutrality CAN'T be implemented: * *Whilst people argue over the virtues of net neutrality as a regulatory > policy, computer science tells us regulatory implementation is a fool=E2= =80=99s > errand.* > Suppose for a moment that you are the victim of a wicked ISP that engages > in disallowed =E2=80=9Cthrottling=E2=80=9D under a =E2=80=9Cneutral=E2=80= =9D regime for Internet access. > You like to access streaming media from a particular =E2=80=9Cover the to= p=E2=80=9D service > provider. By coincidence, the performance of your favoured application > drops at the same time your ISP launches a rival content service of its o= wn. > You then complain to the regulator, who investigates. She finds that your > ISP did indeed change their traffic management settings right at the poin= t > that the =E2=80=9Cthrottling=E2=80=9D began. A swathe of routes, includin= g the one to your > preferred =E2=80=9Cover the top=E2=80=9D application, have been given a d= ifferent packet > scheduling and routing treatment. > It seems like an open-and-shut case of =E2=80=9Cthrottling=E2=80=9D resul= ting in a > disallowed =E2=80=9Cneutrality violation=E2=80=9D. Or is it? > *Here=E2=80=99s why the regulator=E2=80=99s enforcement order will never = survive the > resulting court case and expert witness scrutiny:* *https://www.martingeddes.com/one-reason-net-neutrality-cant-implemented/* I hope you will read the link ^^ before jumping to Martin's conclusion, but still, here it is: > So if not =E2=80=9Cneutrality=E2=80=9D, then what else? > *The only option is to focus on the end-to-end service quality*. The > local traffic management is an *irrelevance* and complete distraction. > Terms like =E2=80=9Cthrottling=E2=80=9D are technically meaningless. The = lawgeneers > who > have written articles and books saying otherwise are unconsciously > incompetent at computer science. > *We computer scientists call this viable alternative =E2=80=9Cend-to-end= =E2=80=9D approach > a =E2=80=9Cquality floor=E2=80=9D*. The good news is that we now have a p= ractical means > to measure it > > and hard science > to > model it. > Maybe we should consciously and competently try it? All the best, Frank Frantisek (Frank) Borsik https://www.linkedin.com/in/frantisekborsik Signal, Telegram, WhatsApp: +421919416714 iMessage, mobile: +420775230885 Skype: casioa5302ca frantisek.borsik@gmail.com On Sun, Oct 1, 2023 at 7:15=E2=80=AFPM Dave Taht via Nnagain < nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote: > I am pleased to see over 100 people have signed up for this list > already. I am not really planning on "activating" this list until > tuesday or so, after a few more people I have reached out to sign up > (or not). > > I would like y=C2=B4all to seek out people with differing opinions and > background, in the hope that one day, we can shed more light than heat > about the science and technologies that "govern" the internet, to > those that wish to regulate it. In the short term, I would like enough > of us to agree on an open letter, or NPRM filing,and to put out a > press release(s), in the hope that this time, the nn and title ii > discussion is more about real, than imagined, internet issues. [1] > > I am basically planning to move the enormous discussion from over > here, titled "network neutrality back in the news": > > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/starlink/2023-September/thread.ht= ml > > to here. I expect that we are going to be doing this discussion for a > long time, and many more issues besides my short term ones will be > discussed. I hope that we can cleanly isolate technical issues from > political ones, in particular, and remain civil, and factual, and > avoid hyperbole. > > Since the FCC announcement of a proposed NPRM as of Oct 19th... my own > initial impetus was to establish why the NN debate first started in > 2005, and the conflict between the legal idea of "common carriage" vs > what the internet was actually capable of in mixing voip and > bittorrent, in > "The Bufferbloat vs Bittorrent vs Voip" phase. Jim Gettys, myself, and > Jason Livinggood have weighed in on their stories on linkedin, > twitter, and elsewhere. > > There was a second phase, somewhat triggered by netflix, that Jonathan > Morton summarized in that thread, ending in the first establishment of > some title ii rules in 2015. > > The third phase was when title ii was rescinded... and all that has > happened since. > > I, for one, am fiercely proud about how our tech community rose to > meet the challenge of covid, and how, for example, videoconferencing > mostly just worked for so many, after a postage stamp sized start in > 2012[2]. The oh-too-faint-praise for that magnificent effort from > higher levels rankles me greatly, but I will try to get it under > control. > > And this fourth phase, opening in a few weeks, is more, I think about > privacy and power than all the other phases, and harmonization with EU > legislation, perhaps. What is on the table for the industry and > internet is presently unknown. > > So here we "NN-again". Lay your issues out! > > > > [1] I have only had one fight with the FCC. Won it handily: > > https://www.computerworld.com/article/2993112/vint-cerf-and-260-experts-g= ive-fcc-a-plan-to-secure-wi-fi-routers.html > In this case this is not so much a fight, I hope, but a collaborative > effort towards a better, faster, lower latency, and more secure, > internet for everyone. > > [2] https://archive.org/details/video1_20191129 > -- > Oct 30: > https://netdevconf.info/0x17/news/the-maestro-and-the-music-bof.html > Dave T=C3=A4ht CSO, LibreQos > _______________________________________________ > Nnagain mailing list > Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain > --000000000000a200a20606ac3997 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
OK, so I will bite the bullet! I have invited Ajit Pai and= Martin Geddes to join us here and let's see if they still have some ti= me and/or even stomach for current round of NN discussion.

Anyway, here is my bullet. I will argue with Martin, that - Net Neutr= ality CAN'T be implemented:=C2=A0

Whilst people argue over the virtues of net neutrality as a reg= ulatory policy, computer science tells us regulatory implementation is a fo= ol=E2=80=99s errand.
Suppose for a moment that you are the victim of= a wicked ISP that engages in disallowed =E2=80=9Cthrottling=E2=80=9D under= a =E2=80=9Cneutral=E2=80=9D regime for Internet access. You like to access= streaming media from a particular =E2=80=9Cover the top=E2=80=9D service p= rovider. By coincidence, the performance of your favoured application drops= at the same time your ISP launches a rival content service of its own.
= You then complain to the regulator, who investigates. She finds that your I= SP did indeed change their traffic management settings right at the point t= hat the =E2=80=9Cthrottling=E2=80=9D began. A swathe of routes, including t= he one to your preferred =E2=80=9Cover the top=E2=80=9D application, have b= een given a different packet scheduling and routing treatment.
It seems = like an open-and-shut case of =E2=80=9Cthrottling=E2=80=9D resulting in a d= isallowed=C2=A0=E2=80=9Cneutrality violation=E2=80=9D. Or is it?
Here= =E2=80=99s why the regulator=E2=80=99s enforcement order will=C2=A0never= =C2=A0survive the resulting court case and expert witness scrutiny:=
=C2=A0

<= /div>

I hope you will read the link ^^ before jumping to= Martin's conclusion, but still, here it is:
=C2=A0
So if not =E2=80=9Cneutrality=E2=80=9D, then what else?
= The=C2=A0only=C2=A0option is to focus on the end-to-end service qual= ity. The local traffic management is an=C2=A0irrelevance=C2=A0an= d complete distraction. Terms like =E2=80=9Cthrottling=E2=80=9D are technic= ally meaningless. The=C2=A0lawgeneers=C2=A0who have written articles and book= s saying otherwise are unconsciously incompetent at computer science.
We computer scientists call this viable alternative =E2=80=9Cend-to-end=E2= =80=9D approach a =E2=80=9Cquality floor=E2=80=9D. The good news is tha= t we now have a=C2=A0practical means to measure it=C2=A0and=C2=A0hard science= =C2=A0to model it.
Maybe we should consciously and competently=C2=A0try = it?


=
All the best,

Frank

Frantisek (Frank) Borsik

=C2=A0=

https://www.linkedin.com/in/frantisekborsik

Signal, Teleg= ram, WhatsApp: +421919416714=C2=A0

iMessage, mobile: +420775230885=

Skype: casioa5302c= a

frantisek.borsik@gmail.com

=


On Sun, Oct 1, 2023 at 7:15=E2=80=AFPM Dave Taht via Nnagain <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net= > wrote:
I am pleased to see over 100 people h= ave signed up for this list
already. I am not really planning on "activating" this list until=
tuesday or so, after a few more people I have reached out to sign up
(or not).

I would like y=C2=B4all to seek out people with differing opinions and
background, in the hope that one day, we can shed more light than heat
about the science and technologies that "govern" the internet, to=
those that wish to regulate it. In the short term, I would like enough
of us to agree on an open letter, or NPRM filing,and to put out a
press release(s), in the hope that this time, the nn and title ii
discussion is more about real, than imagined, internet issues. [1]

I am basically planning to move the enormous discussion from over
here, titled "network neutrality back in the news":

https://lists.bufferbloat= .net/pipermail/starlink/2023-September/thread.html

to here. I expect that we are going to be doing this discussion for a
long time, and many more issues besides my short term ones will be
discussed. I hope that we can cleanly isolate technical issues from
political ones, in particular, and remain civil, and factual, and
avoid hyperbole.

Since the FCC announcement of a proposed NPRM as of Oct 19th... my own
initial impetus was to establish why the NN debate first started in
2005, and the conflict between the legal idea of "common carriage"= ; vs
what the internet was actually capable of in mixing voip and
bittorrent, in
"The Bufferbloat vs Bittorrent vs Voip" phase. Jim Gettys, myself= , and
Jason Livinggood have weighed in on their stories on linkedin,
twitter, and elsewhere.

There was a second phase, somewhat triggered by netflix, that Jonathan
Morton summarized in that thread, ending in the first establishment of
some title ii rules in 2015.

The third phase was when title ii was rescinded... and all that has
happened since.

I, for one, am fiercely proud about how our tech community rose to
meet the challenge of covid, and how, for example, videoconferencing
mostly just worked for so many, after a postage stamp sized start in
2012[2]. The oh-too-faint-praise for that magnificent effort from
higher levels rankles me greatly, but I will try to get it under
control.

And this fourth phase, opening in a few weeks, is more, I think about
privacy and power than all the other phases, and harmonization with EU
legislation, perhaps. What is on the table for the industry and
internet is presently unknown.

So here we "NN-again". Lay your issues out!



[1] I have only had one fight with the FCC. Won it handily:
https://www.computerworld.com/article/2993112/vint-cerf-and= -260-experts-give-fcc-a-plan-to-secure-wi-fi-routers.html
In this case this is not so much a fight, I hope, but a collaborative
effort towards a better, faster, lower latency, and more secure,
internet for everyone.

[2] https://archive.org/details/video1_20191129
--
Oct 30: https://netdevconf.info/= 0x17/news/the-maestro-and-the-music-bof.html
Dave T=C3=A4ht CSO, LibreQos
_______________________________________________
Nnagain mailing list
Nnagain@= lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain
--000000000000a200a20606ac3997--