Wednesday, February 27, 2008
AT&T, TW, Verizon Make Case Against Net Neutrality
Regulation intended to ensure net neutrality will actually kill Internet innovation and crush an industry that has operated effectively through market forces alone, according to major telecom companies like AT&T, Verizon and Time Warner Cable.
Net neutrality advocates have asked the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to "medicate the Internet with a preemptive cocktail of experimental regulatory tonics," lawyers for AT&T wrote in an FCC filing.
"Internet regulation proponents have asked that the commission wade into a competitive marketplace driven by a fierce pace of technological innovation and pick winners and losers by regulatory fiat," added attorneys for Qwest Communications.
At the request of Free Press, the FCC is investigating whether "degrading peer-to-peer traffic" violates FCC rules for reasonable network management. The move comes after an Associated Press article and subsequent Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) test last year concluded that Comcast was blocking user access to peer-to-peer networks. Comcast admitted to delaying traffic during peak hours, but denied blocking P2P applications completely.
The FCC is also examining a petition from file-sharing company Vuze that asks for clarification on what constitutes "reasonable network management."
Telecoms like AT&T and Qwest submitted their comments on February 13, the last day the FCC was accepting public comments on the matter.
AT&T took aim at Google, which has sided with Free Press and Vuze on the issue. Google and Amazon last week issued their support for a net neutrality bill that would require the FCC to examine how Internet service providers manage their networks.
"It would be wholly arbitrary to regulate Comcast's purported 'traffic shaping' but not the content-shaping practices of Google within the search and online advertising markets it monopolizes," AT&T wrote.
Free Press complained that only Comcast knows the algorithm they use to shape traffic within Comcast's network. "But Free Press might just have easily been complaining about Google, which alone knows the secret algorithms it uses to order its search results," AT&T said.
None of the companies would address the accusations against Comcast directly, but they all supported the company's attempt at network management.
"Internet backbone service providers have no economic incentive to engage in the traffic management practices that Vuze fears [because] backbone service providers are fully compensated for the use of their network by their direct customers," according to the Global Crossing filing.
"Broadband providers must retain the flexibility to employ traffic management practices to protect their networks," Time Warner Cable's filing said.
The FCC should not expect telecom companies to publicly share its network management secrets, AT&T insisted. "There is no surer way to compromise the integrity of a given network than broadcasting the technical details of how that network is managed," the company said.
AT&T and Verizon have emerged recently as competitors to Comcast, as both phone providers have moved into the video space. Nonetheless, both companies came to Comcast's defense.
Network management is "appropriate and necessary," Verizon wrote in its filing.
Free Press and Vuze ignore the fact that network management is key to stopping threats like viruses and spam, Verizon wrote.
These issues are "best left to network engineers who must respond to real world concerns" and not regulatory agencies like the FCC, Verizon said.
The lone dissenter among providers was Vonage. Given that Vonage's service rides on cable and telecom carriers' services, Vonage is "critically interested in ensuring that its competitors do not use 'reasonable network management' as a pretext to degrade the performance of Vonage's service," the company wrote.
Vonage expressed concern that unchecked network management might impede its customers' ability to access 911 service. It called on the FCC to make sure access to emergency services was guaranteed.
Four years ago, the FCC mandated that VoIP providers like Vonage provide access to 911 after several unfortunate incidents with VoIP customers who were unaware that their Internet-based phone service did not connect to emergency services.
Net neutrality advocates have asked the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to "medicate the Internet with a preemptive cocktail of experimental regulatory tonics," lawyers for AT&T wrote in an FCC filing.
"Internet regulation proponents have asked that the commission wade into a competitive marketplace driven by a fierce pace of technological innovation and pick winners and losers by regulatory fiat," added attorneys for Qwest Communications.
At the request of Free Press, the FCC is investigating whether "degrading peer-to-peer traffic" violates FCC rules for reasonable network management. The move comes after an Associated Press article and subsequent Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) test last year concluded that Comcast was blocking user access to peer-to-peer networks. Comcast admitted to delaying traffic during peak hours, but denied blocking P2P applications completely.
The FCC is also examining a petition from file-sharing company Vuze that asks for clarification on what constitutes "reasonable network management."
Telecoms like AT&T and Qwest submitted their comments on February 13, the last day the FCC was accepting public comments on the matter.
AT&T took aim at Google, which has sided with Free Press and Vuze on the issue. Google and Amazon last week issued their support for a net neutrality bill that would require the FCC to examine how Internet service providers manage their networks.
"It would be wholly arbitrary to regulate Comcast's purported 'traffic shaping' but not the content-shaping practices of Google within the search and online advertising markets it monopolizes," AT&T wrote.
Free Press complained that only Comcast knows the algorithm they use to shape traffic within Comcast's network. "But Free Press might just have easily been complaining about Google, which alone knows the secret algorithms it uses to order its search results," AT&T said.
None of the companies would address the accusations against Comcast directly, but they all supported the company's attempt at network management.
"Internet backbone service providers have no economic incentive to engage in the traffic management practices that Vuze fears [because] backbone service providers are fully compensated for the use of their network by their direct customers," according to the Global Crossing filing.
"Broadband providers must retain the flexibility to employ traffic management practices to protect their networks," Time Warner Cable's filing said.
The FCC should not expect telecom companies to publicly share its network management secrets, AT&T insisted. "There is no surer way to compromise the integrity of a given network than broadcasting the technical details of how that network is managed," the company said.
AT&T and Verizon have emerged recently as competitors to Comcast, as both phone providers have moved into the video space. Nonetheless, both companies came to Comcast's defense.
Network management is "appropriate and necessary," Verizon wrote in its filing.
Free Press and Vuze ignore the fact that network management is key to stopping threats like viruses and spam, Verizon wrote.
These issues are "best left to network engineers who must respond to real world concerns" and not regulatory agencies like the FCC, Verizon said.
The lone dissenter among providers was Vonage. Given that Vonage's service rides on cable and telecom carriers' services, Vonage is "critically interested in ensuring that its competitors do not use 'reasonable network management' as a pretext to degrade the performance of Vonage's service," the company wrote.
Vonage expressed concern that unchecked network management might impede its customers' ability to access 911 service. It called on the FCC to make sure access to emergency services was guaranteed.
Four years ago, the FCC mandated that VoIP providers like Vonage provide access to 911 after several unfortunate incidents with VoIP customers who were unaware that their Internet-based phone service did not connect to emergency services.
Thursday, February 07, 2008
City Council to consider free Wi-Fi at Loveland Sports Park
Parents who struggle to balance their business lives and their children’s sports schedules may catch a break. LP Broadband, a Loveland Internet provider, has put forth a proposed to provide free wireless Internet at the Loveland Sports Park. The resolution will go before the Loveland City Council for approval tonight.
If passed, the Wi-Fi installation, which takes only one day, will be finished as quickly as possible. The equipment will cost approximately $2,000, said Denise Montagu, the business development manager for LP Broadband.
Montagu of Loveland, proposed the idea to the city of Loveland in October, because she thought it would benefit her business and adults at the park who need constant Internet connections.
“My husband and I sit out at the Loveland Sports Park watching our kids play soccer and practice football,” Montagu said. “A number of times one of us is having (to use the Internet) to finish up work or send a quick e-mail.”
Other parents had also expressed interest to Montagu in having wireless signals at the park.
The connection will be free, but when people connect to the Internet, they will be brought to the LP Broadband home page.
“We get some advertising, people get an amenity, and everybody wins,” Montagu said.
One of the stipulations of installing the Wi-Fi is that it will be turned off when the park is closed.
“We don’t want to encourage people to be going there when it is not open just to get Internet service,” Montagu said.
The Wi-Fi access equipment will be located in the center of the park, and the signal will not be accessible outside the boundaries of the 76-acre park. Although Gary Havener, the Parks and Recreation director, hasn’t heard any feedback about the proposal from City Council members, Montagu expects it to pass, because there has been, “absolutely no opposition.”
If this project is successful, Montagu wants to offer free Wi-Fi at other gathering places like parks or golf courses. The project at the park will be easier to implement than the proposed fee-based Wi-Fi service in downtown Loveland that was discussed last year.
This is because service in the park will be in a smaller, defined area and free of charge, said Marilyn Hilgenburg, the administrative business manager for the city of Loveland Parks and Recreation Department.
“We’re not asking people to buy into the service. It’s not a utility type of access,” Hilgenburg said. Montagu said that offering the service for free is crucial to its success.
“People don’t want to pay (for the Internet connection) when they can go into any Internet cafe and pay $2 for a cup of coffee.”
By Marisa BeahmThe Reporter-Herald
If passed, the Wi-Fi installation, which takes only one day, will be finished as quickly as possible. The equipment will cost approximately $2,000, said Denise Montagu, the business development manager for LP Broadband.
Montagu of Loveland, proposed the idea to the city of Loveland in October, because she thought it would benefit her business and adults at the park who need constant Internet connections.
“My husband and I sit out at the Loveland Sports Park watching our kids play soccer and practice football,” Montagu said. “A number of times one of us is having (to use the Internet) to finish up work or send a quick e-mail.”
Other parents had also expressed interest to Montagu in having wireless signals at the park.
The connection will be free, but when people connect to the Internet, they will be brought to the LP Broadband home page.
“We get some advertising, people get an amenity, and everybody wins,” Montagu said.
One of the stipulations of installing the Wi-Fi is that it will be turned off when the park is closed.
“We don’t want to encourage people to be going there when it is not open just to get Internet service,” Montagu said.
The Wi-Fi access equipment will be located in the center of the park, and the signal will not be accessible outside the boundaries of the 76-acre park. Although Gary Havener, the Parks and Recreation director, hasn’t heard any feedback about the proposal from City Council members, Montagu expects it to pass, because there has been, “absolutely no opposition.”
If this project is successful, Montagu wants to offer free Wi-Fi at other gathering places like parks or golf courses. The project at the park will be easier to implement than the proposed fee-based Wi-Fi service in downtown Loveland that was discussed last year.
This is because service in the park will be in a smaller, defined area and free of charge, said Marilyn Hilgenburg, the administrative business manager for the city of Loveland Parks and Recreation Department.
“We’re not asking people to buy into the service. It’s not a utility type of access,” Hilgenburg said. Montagu said that offering the service for free is crucial to its success.
“People don’t want to pay (for the Internet connection) when they can go into any Internet cafe and pay $2 for a cup of coffee.”
By Marisa BeahmThe Reporter-Herald
