Re:The Unintended Consequences of Rogers' Packet Shaping
by danielha on Wednesday April 11, 2007 @01:42PM
(#11962)
This has led to a technical "cat and mouse" game, with Rogers now one of the only ISPs in the world to simply degrade encrypted traffic.
Wow; that is so stupid.
Reading something like this always sparks some net neutrality support inside of me, but otherwise I'm still on the fence (leaning either way depending on the time of day). The principles of net neutrality are sound, but increased regulation always makes me wary. There may be high costs associated with "a packet is a packet" philosophy; for example, preserving the current nature of the Internet with legislation could stifle major overhauls to its core. And it just seems that some packet bias is necessary to ensure quality services for specific protocols.
I'd be less hesitant about neutrality if the proposed legislations was truly fine tuned to just prevent the ISPs from screwing the customers.
Re:The Unintended Consequences of Rogers' Packet Shaping
by chris on Thursday April 12, 2007 @05:36AM
(#12208)
Interesting, this is also one of the many reasons why Vonage will be unable to survive on its own, being as they are at the mercy of the last-mile carriers like Rogers, Comcast, ATT, etc.
Wow; that is so stupid.
Reading something like this always sparks some net neutrality support inside of me, but otherwise I'm still on the fence (leaning either way depending on the time of day). The principles of net neutrality are sound, but increased regulation always makes me wary. There may be high costs associated with "a packet is a packet" philosophy; for example, preserving the current nature of the Internet with legislation could stifle major overhauls to its core. And it just seems that some packet bias is necessary to ensure quality services for specific protocols.
I'd be less hesitant about neutrality if the proposed legislations was truly fine tuned to just prevent the ISPs from screwing the customers.