definitions of network neutrality
its simplest network neutrality is the principle that all Internet traffic be treated equally. Net neutrality supporters have three main definitions of network neutrality:
Absolute non-discrimination
Columbia Law School professor Tim Wu. “Network neutrality is best defined as a network design principle The idea is that maximum useful public information network is intended for all content, sites and platforms are treated equally.” According to Imprint Magazine, University of Michigan Law School professor Susan P. Crawford, “believes that a neutral Internet must forward packets is a first-come, first served, without regard to quality and service aspects.”
Limited Discrimination without QoS places
U.S. lawmakers have introduced bills that the quality of service discrimination would enable long as no specific subject to a higher quality of service.
Limited discrimination and places
This approach allows higher fees for QoS as long as there is no exclusivity in service contracts. According to Tim Berners-Lee: “If I pay for my connection to the network in a certain quality of service, and you pay for the connection to the network of the same or better quality of service, so you and I can communicate with the network, and that the quality of service “.” [We] each pay to connect to the net, but nobody can not pay for exclusive access to me. “
FCC Broadband Notice
In 2005, the FCC has the Broadband Policy Statement (also known as the Internet Policy Statement), in which four principles of the open Internet,” For broadband connections and encourage the preservation and promotion of open and interconnected nature of public Internet, consumers are entitled to that, “
use the legal Internet content of their choice.
to run applications and use services of their choice, subject to the law enforcement needs.
link the legal basis for the selection of devices that are not harmful to the network.
competition in the network, applications and service providers and content providers.
These items are often summarized as “all legal content, which is a legal application, which is a legal device, which the tenderer “. American Recovery President Barack Obama and Reinvestment Act of 2009 called for $ 7.2 billion investment in broadband infrastructure and transparency in order to participate. During the hearing before the FCC, the National Cable & Telecommunications Association, urged the FCC to four requirements in the 2005 position paper to the Internet to accept the necessary transparency.
In 2008, when the FCC 700 MHz wireless spectrum blocks auctioned in anticipation of the DTV transition, Google pledged to bid and 0.6 billion if the FCC is a carrier frequency to participate in the four conditions:
Open applications: Consumers should able to download and use all applications, content or services they want,
Open devices: Consumers should be able to a portable communication device using a wireless network any time they want,
Open services: third parties (resellers) should be able to purchase wireless services from 700 MHz licensee on the basis of a fairly large non-commercial terms
Open networks: Third parties, such as Internet service providers should be able to connect at any technically feasible at 700 MHz licensed wireless network.
These conditions are substantially equal to the Internet site of the FCC Policy Statement (FCC applications and content into a single bullet, but an extra bullet in the wholesale market by increasing demand for access to external service providers). The FCC has issued only two of these four criteria for the auction, ie., open devices and applications.
In September 2009, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski proposes two new rules for the 2005 position paper, that is., non-discrimination principle ISPs should not discriminate against any of the content, or applications, and the principle of transparency, which requires that Internet service providers to all customers of their policies to communicate. He also claimed that the wireless should be subject to the same network neutrality affiliated providers .
In October 2009, the FCC took the next step in the approval of a proposed rulemaking on net neutrality.
The development concept
In 2003, Tim Wu, Columbia Law School professor published a popular proposal for a network neutrality rule, in his paper Network Neutrality, Broadband Discrimination. Paper should net neutrality in terms of impartiality and neutrality of the range of applications between data and QoS-sensitive traffic, and suggested a number of possible legislation to these problems. Size 2005 and 2006, net neutrality and the future of the Internet to cable companies, consumers and Internet service providers (ISPs) to discuss the issue was almost completely ignored by the media until 2006.
The concept of network neutrality before the current Internet-oriented debate, the current of the age of the telegraph. In 1860 the United States federal law (Pacific Telegraph Act of 1860) established to the telegraph line that states support
messages sent by a person, firm or company, or any telegraph lines connecting this line or endpoint is objective be sent to the order of their receipt except that the Board of Directors have the privilege of broadcasting …
the price for facilitating communications between the Atlantic and Pacific, the electric telegraph, June 16, 1860
In 1888, Almon Brown Strowger invented the automatic telephone switchboard on the bias, which is controlled by calls for a profit to get around.
Supporters
Proponents of net neutrality are consumer lawyers, online businesses, and some technology companies. Several large Internet application companies proponents of neutrality, like Google, Yahoo!, Vonage, eBay, Amazon, IAC / Interactive Corp.. Software giant Microsoft, along with many other companies have also adopted a position supporting the neutrality regulations. Cogent Communications, an international Internet Service Provider a declaration in favor of certain network neutrality policy. According to Google:
Net neutrality is the principle that Internet users should be proficient in what content they view and what applications they use the Internet. The Internet has worked according to this neutrality principle since its earliest days … In essence, net neutrality is about equal access to the Internet. We believe that the broadband carriers should not be used for market power to discriminate against competing applications and content. Just as telephone companies are not allowed for the consumer, who can call you or tell you what they can say, broadband must carriers do not use its market power to control online activity.
uide Net Neutrality Google users
People who are in favor of network neutrality are Moby, RyanHuling ( talc) 1:46 9 February 2010 (UTC), Tim Berners-Lee, Vinton Cerf, Lawrence Lessig, Robert W. McChesney, Steve Wozniak, Susan P. Crawford, and David Reed, and President Barack Obama.
A number of interested neutrality emerged as SaveTheInternet.com describing net neutrality as follows:
Net Neutrality means no discrimination. Net Neutrality prevents Internet providers to ensure, accelerate or slowing down Web content based on the source, ownership or destination.
aveTheInternet.com Help
Arguments network neutrality
This part is written in the style of a conversation rather than encyclopedic summary. may need cleanup to meet Wikipedia’s quality standards and more accessible to the general public. Talk to the talk page. (October 2009)
Control Data
Proponents of net neutrality would oblige cable companies allow internet service providers (ISPs) free access to their cable lines, which is called a joint agreement for the carriage, and the model used for dial-up Internet. They want to ensure that cable companies can not monitor, suspend, or filter Internet content without a court order.
SaveTheInternet.com the fault of the cable and telecommunications companies desire “is an Internet gatekeepers , to decide which sites you fast or slow, and that is not loaded. “According SaveTheInternet.com these companies want to” tax content providers to the timely delivery of data to ensure … their own search engines, Internet telephony and streaming video in slow or block competitors an advantage. “”. The Internet is designed with no gatekeepers over new content or services “Vinton Cerf, inventor of the Internet Protocol (IP) and the current president and Chief Internet Evangelist at Google, has supported efforts to establish a network neutrality legislation in the United States to create, maintain that Cerf said:
Allowing broadband carriers to control what people see and do online would undermine the principles that have made the Internet so ” n success.
Cerf is a testament to the Congress, February 7, 2006
digital rights and freedoms
Lawrence Lessig and Robert W. McChesney argue that network neutrality ensures that the Internet is free and open technology, among others, to promote democratic communication.
Competition and Innovation
Net Neutrality supporters claim, the cable companies, or what is called the “gatekeepers of content” to a toll order to guarantee quality and a premium delivery would result in what Tim Wu calls the unfair business model. You must warn that the recovery of “a website, small blogger on Google”, the network owners are able to competitors sites and services to prevent and deny who can not pay. According to Tim Wu, the cable companies plan to “carve out bandwidth” to their own television services and businesses pay a fee “priority” service.
Proponents of net neutrality view, allows preferential treatment of traffic and a tiered service would newer online companies at a disadvantage, and slow down innovation in online services. Tim Wu argues that without network neutrality, the Internet is experiencing transformation of the market “, where innovation rules, like a lot to do with the rules.” SaveTheInternet.com of net neutrality will lead to “level playing field” and that “the Internet is always driven by innovation. Sites and services succeeded or failed in its own merits. “According to Lawrence Lessig and Robert W. McChesney:
Without net neutrality, the Internet seems to start cable TV. A handful of large companies to access to deliver content to decide what you see and how much it costs to check. Large areas like health, finance, retailing and gambling would be huge tariffs for fast and safe use of the internet … Most of the great innovators in the history of the Internet began their garages with great ideas and little capital. This is no coincidence. Net neutrality protections minimized control of the network owners, maximized competition and invited outsiders to innovate. Net neutrality guaranteed a free and competitive market for Internet content.
awrence Lessig & Robert W. McChesney
Maintaining an Internet standards
Some people [who?] state that the holder of the existing network providers to ignore segregation and transport layers of the Internet is a motion that the issue of Internet standards and the standards process can be used by the Internet industry itself will communicate.
I [who?] Network neutrality of any practice that involves the transfer of the bits in the transport layer are based on the design charts, design flexibility for reducing traffic. [Edit]
Prevention pseudo-services
Alok Bhardwaj claims that all violations of network neutrality realistic, not a real investment payouts to present, but unnecessary and questionable services. He believes that it is unlikely that new investments are made to specific networks, certain sites to end users faster. Instead, he believes that the non-independence of the network using the service quality compensation for sites that want to avoid slow retrieve required.
End-to-end principle
Main article: End-to-end principle
Some network neutrality proponents say is necessary to maintain the end-to-end principle. According to Lawrence Lessig and Robert W. McChesney:
Net neutrality simply means that all Internet content is treated the same way and moving with the same speed across the network. Owners of Internet cables can not be separated. This is a simple but brilliant “end-to-end” design of the Internet that has such a strong economy and society.
awrence Lessig & Robert W. McChesney:
This principle means that a neutral network is a dumb network, only in the package, regardless of the applications they support. This perspective is revealed by David S. Isenberg in his famous paper , The Rise of the Stupid Network
The new network “philosophy and architecture,” replacing the vision of the Intelligent Network. Vision is one where the public communications network would be designed for “always on” use, not intermittence and scarcity. It is designed for the end user the intelligence of the device is a network. And the network is intended to “Deliver Bits, Stupid” is not a fancy network routing or “smart” number translation .. In the .. Stupid Network, the data tell the network where to go. (Instead, the circuit network, the network shows the data where to go.) Where the Stupid Network, the information must be the boss … . Terminal is free to take a flexible, since a data network StupidVideos the boss, the bits in a practically free, it is not assumed that the data within a data rate, or the nature of the data.
avid S. Isenberg Rise of the Stupid Network
In contrast to this idea, the research in his book End-to-end arguments in system design Saltzer, Reed and Clark claims that the intelligence of the network version is not the end of the obligation to incoming data for errors and the maximum speed of the sender, rather than the wholesale removal of “intelligent” network core to arrival.
Opponents
Opponents of network neutrality are the major hardware companies, and members of the cable and telecommunications industries.
Net neutrality regulations, unlike some engineers said the Internet, such as Professor David Farber and TCP inventor Bob Kahn. Vinton Cerf is supported, while others are at a regulated network neutrality.
Robert Pepper is a Senior Managing Director, global advanced technology policy, Cisco Systems and is a former FCC chief of policy development. he says. “The proponents of net neutrality regulation believe that the new rules are necessary, according to them, without too much regulation, service providers can block the bandwidth and services, to a divided world where the wealthy enjoy first-class internet to create, while everything else remains slow connection and breaks down the content. This scenario is the wrong paradigm. This all-or-nothing world today, and it does not appear in the future. Without additional regulation, service providers will likely continue to do what they do. They will continue to provide a variety of broadband service plans offer different price ranges to suit all types of consumers. “
Bob Kahn, one of these on the internet said the network neutrality is a slogan that freezing of innovation at the heart of the Internet.
Dave Farber, Michael Katz, Christopher Yoo, Gerald Faulhaber and Farber, called the “grandfather of the Internet, because he taught many of the chief designer has written and spoken strongly continuous research and development of the major Internet protocols. He began his academic colleagues, Michael Katz, Chris Yoo, and Gerald Faulhaber, and Op-Ed in Washington Post, and very critical of network neutrality, which states that “the Internet is a make-over needs. Unfortunately, the Congress initiatives aimed at preserving the best of the old Internet threaten the emergence of a new bud. “
The opposition must also think tanks like the Cato Institute and the Competitive Enterprise Institute. Goldwater Institute and the American tax reform have also suggested that this principle may violate the First Amendment.
Many of these opponents have a site called Hands Off the Internet to the arguments against net neutrality to explain. Major financial support for the site should be AT & T, and technology companies and members of the pro-market advocacy group of citizens of the government waste. astroturfing company claimed.
The arguments against net neutrality
This part is written in the style of a conversation rather than encyclopedic summary. It may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia’s quality standards and more accessible to the general public. can be discussed on the talk page. (October 2009)
innovations and investments
Some opponents of net neutrality believe that the prioritization of bandwidth is essential for future innovation on the Internet. telecommunications providers, such as telephone and cable companies, and some technology companies that offer networking equipment, set telecom providers should be allowed preferential treatment in the form of differentiated services, for example by providing online companies willing to pay for the ability to transmit their data packets to be transferred faster than any other Internet traffic. Added by revenues from these services to pay for the construction of an increase in broadband access to more consumers. Opponents of network neutrality have also argued that network neutrality regulation would have a negative effect on innovation and competition in the broadband access market by making Internet service providers (ISPs) and other network operators to recover their investments to earn in broadband networks. John Thorne, Senior Vice President and Deputy General Counsel of Verizon, broadband and telecommunications company, has claimed that they have no incentive to have to invest heavily in the development of advanced fiber optic networks as they are prohibited from charging higher premiums for right to companies wishing to benefit from the enhanced features of such networks. Thorne, and other ISPs
