Comments on: Jitter and Network Neutrality http://techliberation.com/2006/04/01/jitter-and-network-neutrality/ Keeping politicians' hands off the Net & everything else related to technology Tue, 14 Feb 2012 12:51:08 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: MikeT http://techliberation.com/2006/04/01/jitter-and-network-neutrality/comment-page-1/#comment-54427 MikeT Mon, 03 Apr 2006 15:10:36 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/04/01/jitter-and-network-neutrality/#comment-54427 <p>How about we just apply good old fashion anti-trust laws instead? Let them discriminate where it makes sense, like allowing bit torrent users to only have 10% of the bandwidth. In cases where it is purely about shutting down the competition, then step in. The public and market are not served by having companies like Vonage taken down, not by inability to compete, but by technical attacks launched by companies that want to offer competing services.</p> How about we just apply good old fashion anti-trust laws instead? Let them discriminate where it makes sense, like allowing bit torrent users to only have 10% of the bandwidth. In cases where it is purely about shutting down the competition, then step in. The public and market are not served by having companies like Vonage taken down, not by inability to compete, but by technical attacks launched by companies that want to offer competing services.

]]> By: MikeT http://techliberation.com/2006/04/01/jitter-and-network-neutrality/comment-page-1/#comment-33035 MikeT Mon, 03 Apr 2006 14:10:36 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/04/01/jitter-and-network-neutrality/#comment-33035 <p>How about we just apply good old fashion anti-trust laws instead? Let them discriminate where it makes sense, like allowing bit torrent users to only have 10% of the bandwidth. In cases where it is purely about shutting down the competition, then step in. The public and market are not served by having companies like Vonage taken down, not by inability to compete, but by technical attacks launched by companies that want to offer competing services.</p> How about we just apply good old fashion anti-trust laws instead? Let them discriminate where it makes sense, like allowing bit torrent users to only have 10% of the bandwidth. In cases where it is purely about shutting down the competition, then step in. The public and market are not served by having companies like Vonage taken down, not by inability to compete, but by technical attacks launched by companies that want to offer competing services.

]]> By: Tom Dunstan http://techliberation.com/2006/04/01/jitter-and-network-neutrality/comment-page-1/#comment-54426 Tom Dunstan Mon, 03 Apr 2006 13:35:51 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/04/01/jitter-and-network-neutrality/#comment-54426 <p>Nice post. Of course, Tim, one possible answer to the question of how to separate deliberate jitter from incidental jitter was contained in your last paragraph: if gamers aren't getting jitter but Skype users are, it could certainly be argued to be evidence of discrimination.</p> <p><br></p> <p>Down here in Oz it isn't such a problem, because Telstra were forced to open up access to last mile copper to competing ISPs wanting to do DSL. The wholesale interface between Telstra and the ISPs is policed carefully, but ISPs themselves are resposible for jittery or otherwise traffic out to the rest of the net, and competition does its thing, as there are stacks of ISPs in any DSL-capable area. That all sounds a bit different to a lot of places in the US where the only available ISP is also your phone company... a clear conflict of interest.</p> Nice post. Of course, Tim, one possible answer to the question of how to separate deliberate jitter from incidental jitter was contained in your last paragraph: if gamers aren’t getting jitter but Skype users are, it could certainly be argued to be evidence of discrimination.


Down here in Oz it isn’t such a problem, because Telstra were forced to open up access to last mile copper to competing ISPs wanting to do DSL. The wholesale interface between Telstra and the ISPs is policed carefully, but ISPs themselves are resposible for jittery or otherwise traffic out to the rest of the net, and competition does its thing, as there are stacks of ISPs in any DSL-capable area. That all sounds a bit different to a lot of places in the US where the only available ISP is also your phone company… a clear conflict of interest.

]]> By: Tom Dunstan http://techliberation.com/2006/04/01/jitter-and-network-neutrality/comment-page-1/#comment-33034 Tom Dunstan Mon, 03 Apr 2006 12:35:51 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/04/01/jitter-and-network-neutrality/#comment-33034 <p>Nice post. Of course, Tim, one possible answer to the question of how to separate deliberate jitter from incidental jitter was contained in your last paragraph: if gamers aren't getting jitter but Skype users are, it could certainly be argued to be evidence of discrimination.</p> <p>Down here in Oz it isn't such a problem, because Telstra were forced to open up access to last mile copper to competing ISPs wanting to do DSL. The wholesale interface between Telstra and the ISPs is policed carefully, but ISPs themselves are resposible for jittery or otherwise traffic out to the rest of the net, and competition does its thing, as there are stacks of ISPs in any DSL-capable area. That all sounds a bit different to a lot of places in the US where the only available ISP is also your phone company... a clear conflict of interest.</p> Nice post. Of course, Tim, one possible answer to the question of how to separate deliberate jitter from incidental jitter was contained in your last paragraph: if gamers aren’t getting jitter but Skype users are, it could certainly be argued to be evidence of discrimination.

Down here in Oz it isn’t such a problem, because Telstra were forced to open up access to last mile copper to competing ISPs wanting to do DSL. The wholesale interface between Telstra and the ISPs is policed carefully, but ISPs themselves are resposible for jittery or otherwise traffic out to the rest of the net, and competition does its thing, as there are stacks of ISPs in any DSL-capable area. That all sounds a bit different to a lot of places in the US where the only available ISP is also your phone company… a clear conflict of interest.

]]>