[CAnet - news] Network Neutrality & Campus Technologies: Evolution or Intelligent Re-Design?

For more information on this item please visit the CANARIE CA*net 4 Optical
Internet program web site at http://www.canarie.ca/canet4/library/list.html
-------------------------------------------

[Joe St Sauveur at UoOregon once again I think has provided some very
thoughtful and insightful analysis of the Network Neutrality debate as well
as convergence particularly with respect to campus network issues.  I highly
recommend looking at his presentations at the recent NorthWest Academic
Computing Conference.  With Joe's permission here is an excerpt of a recent
e-mail exchange -- BSA]

>From his presentation:

"Virtually all higher education-related network or IT-related organizations
(such as Educause, Internet2, ACE, AAU, NASULGC, ALA, etc.) support network
neutrality rather than the carrier-favored network non-regulation...But we
need to "thread the needle" carefully.-- remember that higher ed runs it's
own   uncongested/exclusive network [Internet 2/NLR], and higher ed also
routinely relies on packet shaping to control recreational traffic on its
own networks"

Joe writes:

"My talk, "The Inescapable Inevitability of Convergence (Unless You
'Help')", http://www.uoregon.edu/~joe/convergence/nwacc2006.pdf (or .ppt),
attempted to deal with two fundamental issues:

-- A technical issue:

   At root, the network neutrality/anti-regulation debate represents an
   attempt to introduce something that's beyond best effort packet delivery
   (e.g., premium QoS); if we build fast, overprovisioned, architecturally 
   clean best effort packet networks, QoS should satisfy no need and
   deliver no discernable benefit.

   Thus, if we have fast, overprovisioned, architecturally clean best effort
   packet networks, the whole network neutrality/anti-regulation debate
   becomes effectively moot.

-- A policy issue: 

   A Libertarian facing the network neutrality/anti-regulation debate
   has a tough (fundamentally irreconcilable?) choice:

   -- on the one hand, she might want to insure that all ideas are given
      a chance to be freely expressed on a level playing field (which 
      would imply a preference for network neutrality)

   -- on the other hand, she'd likely also want to avoid government 
      intervention and regulation of business affairs, preferring to 
      leave that to the owners of each business (which would 
      imply a preference for Internet non-regulation)... 

   This debate sets up one heck of a Hobson's choice, eh?"


-------------------------------------
To SUBSCRIBE:
send a blank e-mail message to
[email protected]

To UNSUBSCRIBE:
send a blank email message to
[email protected]
-------------------------------------

These news items and comments are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect
those  of the CANARIE board or management.


-----------
[email protected]
www.canarie.ca/~bstarn
skype: pocketpro
SkypeIn: +1 614 441-9603


_______________________________________________
news mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.canarie.ca/mailman/listinfo/news