From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from bosmailout01.eigbox.net (bosmailout01.eigbox.net [66.96.184.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 83B0A3CB37 for ; Mon, 2 Oct 2023 15:18:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from bosmailscan07.eigbox.net ([10.20.15.7]) by bosmailout01.eigbox.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1qnOR0-0001vs-4B for nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net; Mon, 02 Oct 2023 15:18:26 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=alum.mit.edu; s=dkim; h=Sender:Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Date: Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Cc:To:From:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=k3qU8//7e+vd8ZE8vOCJBuVVdH0Ly0ZdcGOdVP3+/5I=; b=bxNyueLiOqVgJJAQPDJ9Z8c9P0 F3W1/EDCWo+ObWF3Ep+rSzur2EhjealdNHUwn2jZ5lhgyhV0PfQDXsPsIQc5H28kcJzQo7UIJOOyx 2uD21Lu+0l3ufC6A9ijS3X5Bxh5g73cpMQIuA6e//s68A5IFiY+Tsq1S48wstRy6Ke0b6Uv9jCHcW HPAPQjKW9pXRz5IQMilafMp1ZPsyqkiHmL/TslxGVxZk420xof0ku8OpitBHrlXXbSgz2JF3TyaRG qCyPT8GRQV0aJhAN9E/TpHqE0gitas80VMVpIJrrTKJ62Hiy23GuTrY22GtisV8KIL9WUeHiwilJ7 JSimOxBg==; Received: from [10.115.3.33] (helo=bosimpout13) by bosmailscan07.eigbox.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1qnOQz-0000fr-Sp for nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net; Mon, 02 Oct 2023 15:18:25 -0400 Received: from bosauthsmtp07.yourhostingaccount.com ([10.20.18.7]) by bosimpout13 with id t7JN2A00J099BUA017JRKu; Mon, 02 Oct 2023 15:18:25 -0400 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.3 cv=G76H7+s5 c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=x8qw8EAkfcRkIpZA8Q87Bg==:117 a=tKttg/DTfI8zZz0UFxdR5w==:17 a=bhdUkHdE2iEA:10 a=r77TgQKjGQsHNAKrUKIA:9 a=kurRqvosAAAA:8 a=M4UmwpUJDM6oPOlAP4oA:9 a=wPNLvfGTeEIA:10 a=SSmOFEACAAAA:8 a=jvxJhH2ejZ24dSGet9YA:9 a=sJFUq5R3YU93Y-lj:21 a=UiCQ7L4-1S4A:10 a=hTZeC7Yk6K0A:10 a=kbxRQ_lfPIoQnHsAj2-A:22 Received: from c-73-158-253-41.hsd1.ca.comcast.net ([73.158.253.41]:55056 helo=SRA6) by bosauthsmtp07.eigbox.net with esmtpa (Exim) id 1qnOQw-0008SY-8v; Mon, 02 Oct 2023 15:18:22 -0400 Reply-To: From: "Dick Roy" To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?'Network_Neutrality_is_back!_Let=B4s_make_the_technical_as?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?pects_heard_this_time!'?= References: <6753C846-DD37-434B-9A07-8EFE4FEE7AF6@cable.comcast.com> <18af0df4e0b.edb34c95711106.5401229236188491451@phillywisper.net> <2B67FB81-1976-4DCE-9198-4CCCF13D9FFC@cable.comcast.com> In-Reply-To: <2B67FB81-1976-4DCE-9198-4CCCF13D9FFC@cable.comcast.com> Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2023 12:18:19 -0700 Organization: SRA Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_05D4_01D9F52A.8A1FC630" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 Thread-Index: AQHZ9KFBRg+f2MtJgEyaZSNjOR0+erA1aKWAgAATuoCAAMQ2gIAAVfcA///0agCAAFX6IA== X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE X-EN-UserInfo: f809475445fb8041985048e338e1a001:931c98230c6409dcc37fa7e93b490c27 X-EN-AuthUser: dickroy@intellicommunications.com Sender: "Dick Roy" X-EN-OrigIP: 73.158.253.41 X-EN-OrigHost: c-73-158-253-41.hsd1.ca.comcast.net Subject: Re: [NNagain] On "Throttling" behaviors 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: Mon, 02 Oct 2023 19:18:26 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_05D4_01D9F52A.8A1FC630 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20 =20 -----Original Message----- From: Nnagain [mailto:nnagain-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net] On Behalf = Of Livingood, Jason via Nnagain Sent: Monday, October 2, 2023 11:10 AM To: Network Neutrality is back! Let=B4s make the technical aspects heard = this time! Cc: Livingood, Jason Subject: Re: [NNagain] On "Throttling" behaviors =20 On 10/2/23, 10:51, "Nnagain on behalf of Mark Steckel via Nnagain" on behalf of nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net > = wrote: =20 > In both cases it is rational for the ISPs to favor this content over = other content. This can be done by zero tier ratings, throttling, etc. =20 What I have observed in practice is the businesses of connectivity and content are separately run & tend to act with a very high degree of independence. To take the example of throttling - all that would do is = (1) prompt customer contacts [RR] Did you mean =93contracts=94? - driving cost to the ISP, or (2) prompt churn - also driving cost + reducing revenue. My personal view is that the whole notion of = throttling streaming video (or whatever) is a non-issue to any large ISP. That is = why I think there is consensus support for 'no throttling or blocking' in the = ISP community. =20 =20 > While there are numerous issues around NN, the core of it starts with whether the public and companies that use the Internet are entitled to transparent, fair and and equal access to the Internet.=20 =20 That is likely why I think industry writ large agrees with the notion of = no blocking/throttling/prioritization. =20 JL =20 _______________________________________________ Nnagain mailing list Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain ------=_NextPart_000_05D4_01D9F52A.8A1FC630 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Nnagain [mailto:nnagain-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net] On Behalf = Of Livingood, Jason via Nnagain
Sent: Monday, October 2, 2023 11:10 AM
To: Network Neutrality is back! Let=B4s make the technical aspects heard = this time!
Cc: Livingood, Jason
Subject: Re: [NNagain] On "Throttling" = behaviors

 

On 10/2/23, 10:51, "Nnagain on behalf of Mark Steckel via Nnagain" <nnagain-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net <mailto:nnagain-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net> on behalf of nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net = <mailto:nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net>> wrote:

 

> In both cases it is rational for the ISPs to favor this = content over other content. This can be done by zero tier ratings, throttling, = etc.

 

What I have observed in practice is the businesses of = connectivity and content are separately run & tend to act with a very high degree of independence. To take the example of throttling - all that would do is = (1) prompt customer contacts

[RR] Did = you mean “contracts”?

=A0- driving cost to the ISP, or (2) prompt churn - also driving = cost + reducing revenue. My personal view is that the whole notion of = throttling streaming video (or whatever) is a non-issue to any large ISP. That is = why I think there is consensus support for 'no throttling or blocking' in the = ISP community.=A0=A0

 

> While there are numerous issues around NN, the core of it = starts with whether the public and companies that use the Internet are entitled = to transparent, fair and and equal access to the Internet. =

 

That is likely why I think industry writ large agrees with the = notion of no blocking/throttling/prioritization.

 

JL

 

_______________________________________________=

Nnagain mailing list

Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net

https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain<= /font>

------=_NextPart_000_05D4_01D9F52A.8A1FC630--