I have seen the BEREC draft also mentioned clearly here: http://tweakers.net/reviews/4641/1/netneutraliteit-wat-gaat-er-veranderen-netneutraliteit-europees-en-nederlands.html
It gives a nice explanation what is going to happen with net neutrality and what BEREC actually wants to achieve. In short: Net neutrality needs to be guaranteed, unless its for a specialized service. The post specifically mentions the "zero-rating", where providers are providing free mb's for specialist websites and connections with certain IP's. In Holland we have something called the "fair-use policy". This means that people who are using more than 10 times the average per month will get their data squeezed to prevent congestion. This type of service is a fixed-fee service where there is totally no differentiation on IP-level, they only monitor throughput and block certain ports in case they suspect you are abusing their policy. This is in place in ALL wired networks, and the ISP is only a provider for the connection with the backbone (internet). In wireless (mobile phone connection) however, its a different thing. Some providers use a fair-use policy (where only mobiles are allowed with tethering, no mifi or private networks that pump data continuously) while others use a limit (usually 1 or 2 gb of traffic), usually with a "zero-rating" for certain services (like spotify), however this was banned since it introduced unfair business practices. I personally think that net neutrality should not be able to get them mixed up: Either you provide a guaranteed bandwith independent on the connection (fair-use policy, go over a limit and they will throttle the speed) or you provide a data throughput limit where you buy a certain amount of gb with a guaranteed speed. Services where you have an unlimited data plan for a certain service while other services are limited are not really "net neutral", since they favor a certain service. When people hear "unlimited", they associate this with "no limit", and will connect anything to that system (with the problem that it will cause congestion if abused). For VoIP or VPN's or anything requiring a certain bandwith, the "guaranteed bandwith" is the best way to go. Leased lines have a similar idea, where you as company guarantee to provide a certain bandwith from endpoint to endpoint, regardless what sits between them. These ways are more friendly and aim towards the ISP as a "provider to the backbone", rather than a "provider of services". It also prevents cases where unknown services are getting "squeezed" to force them to work together, like in the case of Netflix & Comcast. It also creates a "truly" neutral system, where discrimination based on IP is not possible anymore. Simply said: If I make a connection with a server in a datacenter, my ISP should not make a differentiation if that connection is for spotify, last.fm or google music. The ISP should treat each one equally, and no "zero-rating" should be in place for one of them, since that beats the whole idea of "net neutrality". On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 6:58 AM Gordon Lennox <[email protected]> wrote: > > I seem to remember some people thinking that the “network neutrality” > debate in the EU was over when the Regulation was adopted last year. > > > But this is what Commissioner Oettinger said in April in Brussels at the > NetFutures event: > > > << The challenge is that communication networks themselves have to evolve > and to adapt to the new digital economy. They need to move from "one size > fits all" and "best effort", towards networks that can adapt to the > versatile requirements of many industries, and that can deliver guaranteed > and ubiquitous quality of service. > > > This is precisely what 5G is aimed to achieve: Changing communication > networks into innovation platforms rather than mere voice and data pipes. >> > > > > https://ec.europa.eu/commission/2014-2019/oettinger/announcements/keynote-speech-closing-plenary-session-net-futures-2016-brussels_en > > > Now we have a fairly short public consultation on the draft BEREC > Guidelines. > > > << Regulation (EU) 2015/2120 included new Net Neutrality rules to > safeguard equal and non-discriminatory treatment of traffic in the > provision of Internet Access Service. It specified that BEREC lay down > guidelines on the implementation by NRAs of their obligations to monitor > and ensure compliance with the rules. The Guidelines aim to contribute to > the consistent application of the Regulation, thereby contributing to > regulatory certainty for stakeholders. >> > > > > http://berec.europa.eu/eng/document_register/subject_matter/berec/public_consultations/6075-draft-berec-guidelines-on-implementation-by-national-regulators-of-european-net-neutrality-rules > > > For comments from TheRegister see: > > > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/06/08/net_neutrality_requirement_for_equal_treatment_of_internet_traffic_does_not_mean_users_must_experience_the_same_quality_of_service/ > <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/06/08/net_neutrality_requirement_for_equal_treatment_of_internet_traffic_does_not_mean_users_must_experience_the_same_quality_of_service/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=gplus> > > > And elsewhere: > > > https://savetheinternet.eu > > > https://edri.org/make-break-summer-eu-net-neutrality-first-stop-vienna/ > > > > http://arstechnica.co.uk/tech-policy/2016/06/eu-net-neutrality-draft-guidelines-released-berec/ > > > > https://netzpolitik.org/2016/leak-eus-forthcoming-net-neutrality-rules-heres-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly/ > > > > http://motherboard.vice.com/read/europe-is-about-to-make-some-big-decisions-on-net-neutrality > > > Enjoy, > > > Gordon > > >
