A list of ways to “Break the Internet” for the 48 hours before the FCC vote

Re:A list of ways to “Break the Internet” for the 48 hours b... by MAGZine on Tuesday December 12, 2017 @06:21PM (#15910457)

Yes, because it means treating packets different based on their contents. In this case, the contents are some header flag.

Is it harmful to the internet? Yes, because it promotes winners and losers. Not just from the consumer perspective. Maybe corporations can pay to have faster downlink to your customers using the same technology.

Current regulations do not allow it. Or, at the minimum, it's a grey area.

You might have seen your argument branded as an "internet fast lane," which I'd suspect would be so much of a fast lane as a slow lane for everyone else.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A list of ways to “Break the Internet” for the 48 hours b... by SilasX on Tuesday December 12, 2017 @07:05PM (#15910751)

How is that any different from allowing someone to pay more to use more of a plane (e.g. first class seats)? Is this just a general argument that everyone should pay the same and get the same?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A list of ways to “Break the Internet” for the 48 hours b... by icebraining on Wednesday December 13, 2017 @08:05AM (#15913949)

The analogy of the planes is not very helpful, because each flight is paid for individually. The idea is that traffic to certain peers (not the ISP customers, but whoever they are communicating with) should not be discriminated against. So you can pay for faster service, but all packets coming from or to you would get flagged, not just those going to certain servers.

[ Parent | on HN ]