Re: [WISPA] [SPAM] "FCC Confirms Delay of New Net Neutrality Rules Until 2015"

[Mike Hammett]

Who is they? 

I think the only person that really would have an issue with this is Josh 
Reynolds up in Alaska... and I'm not even sure that would happen. 

Too much competition in the transit world for that ever to be an issue. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

- Original Message -

From: "Tim Kerns"  
To: "WISPA General List"  
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2014 9:29:14 AM 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] [SPAM] "FCC Confirms Delay of New Net Neutrality Rules 
Until 2015" 

Don't you think they will throttle us also... 

Make us pay for fast lane just like their other customers... only worst for 
us.. think ESPN 

Don't misunderstand me... I don't like the net neutrality as its being 
proposed, but I also don't want some services favored over others and forced 
to pay more the get them equal. 

-Original Message- 
From: Matt Hoppes 
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2014 4:05 AM 
To: WISPA General List 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] [SPAM] "FCC Confirms Delay of New Net Neutrality Rules 
Until 2015" 

Is there any more information on what exactly the FCC is proposing to 
propose? I know there was Title II thrown around 

How would that impact us, or any other carrier? Net neutrality is about 
giving all packets equal access -- if I already do that, do I have 
anything to fear? 

I for one would love to see Net neutrality fall on its face, the big 
ISPs start throtteling traffic, and just have customers driven to us 
little guys who don't throttle. 

On 11/11/14, 8:33 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: 
> from: 
> http://tech.slashdot.org/story/14/11/11/2345213/fcc-confirms-delay-of-new-net-neutrality-rules-until-2015
>  
> 
> "/The Federal Communications Commission will abandon 
> <http://www.dailydot.com/politics/net-neutrality-fcc-tom-wheeler-delayed-obama/>
>  
> its earlier 
> promise 
> <https://www.fcc.gov/blog/setting-record-straight-fcc-s-open-internet-rules> 
> to 
> make a decision on new net neutrality rules this year. Instead, FCC 
> Press Secretary Kim Hart said, "there will not be a vote on open 
> internet rules on the December meeting agenda. That would mean rules 
> would now be finalized in 2015." The FCC's confirmation of the delay 
> came just as President Barack Obama launched a campaign 
> <http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/11/10/statement-president-net-neutrality>
>  
> to 
> persuade the agency to reclassify broadband Internet service as a public 
> utility./Opensource.com is also running an interview with a legal 
> advisor at the FCC 
> <http://opensource.com/government/14/11/fcc-advisor-talks-net-neutrality>. 
> He says, "There will be a burden on providers. The question is, 'Is that 
> burden justified?' And I think our answer is 'Yes.'"" 
> -- 
> 
> Josh Reynolds, Chief Information Officer 
> SPITwSPOTS, www.spitwspots.com <http://www.spitwspots.com> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___ 
> Wireless mailing list 
> Wireless@wispa.org 
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless 
> 
___ 
Wireless mailing list 
Wireless@wispa.org 
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless 

___ 
Wireless mailing list 
Wireless@wispa.org 
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless 

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Re: [WISPA] [SPAM] "FCC Confirms Delay of New Net Neutrality Rules Until 2015"

[josh]

This is my fear as well.

On November 12, 2014 6:29:14 AM AKST, Tim Kerns  wrote:
>Don't you think they will throttle us also...
>
>Make us pay for fast lane just like their other customers... only worst
>for 
>us.. think ESPN
>
>Don't misunderstand me... I don't like the net neutrality as its being 
>proposed, but I also don't want some services favored over others and
>forced 
>to pay more the get them equal.
>
>-Original Message- 
>From: Matt Hoppes
>Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2014 4:05 AM
>To: WISPA General List
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] [SPAM] "FCC Confirms Delay of New Net Neutrality
>Rules 
>Until 2015"
>
>Is there any more information on what exactly the FCC is proposing to
>propose?  I know there was Title II thrown around
>
>How would that impact us, or any other carrier?  Net neutrality is
>about
>giving all packets equal access -- if I already do that, do I have
>anything to fear?
>
>I for one would love to see Net neutrality fall on its face, the big
>ISPs start throtteling traffic, and just have customers driven to us
>little guys who don't throttle.
>
>On 11/11/14, 8:33 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote:
>> from:
>>
>http://tech.slashdot.org/story/14/11/11/2345213/fcc-confirms-delay-of-new-net-neutrality-rules-until-2015
>>
>> "/The Federal Communications Commission will abandon
>>
><http://www.dailydot.com/politics/net-neutrality-fcc-tom-wheeler-delayed-obama/>
>
>> its earlier
>> promise
>>
><https://www.fcc.gov/blog/setting-record-straight-fcc-s-open-internet-rules>
>
>> to
>> make a decision on new net neutrality rules this year. Instead, FCC
>> Press Secretary Kim Hart said, "there will not be a vote on open
>> internet rules on the December meeting agenda. That would mean rules
>> would now be finalized in 2015." The FCC's confirmation of the delay
>> came just as President Barack Obama launched a campaign
>>
><http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/11/10/statement-president-net-neutrality>
>
>> to
>> persuade the agency to reclassify broadband Internet service as a
>public
>> utility./Opensource.com is also running an interview with a legal
>> advisor at the FCC
>>
><http://opensource.com/government/14/11/fcc-advisor-talks-net-neutrality>.
>> He says, "There will be a burden on providers. The question is, 'Is
>that
>> burden justified?' And I think our answer is 'Yes.'""
>> -- 
>>
>> Josh Reynolds, Chief Information Officer
>> SPITwSPOTS, www.spitwspots.com <http://www.spitwspots.com>
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Wireless mailing list
>> Wireless@wispa.org
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>___
>Wireless mailing list
>Wireless@wispa.org
>http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless 
>
>___
>Wireless mailing list
>Wireless@wispa.org
>http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Re: [WISPA] [SPAM] "FCC Confirms Delay of New Net Neutrality Rules Until 2015"

[Tim Kerns]

Don't you think they will throttle us also...

Make us pay for fast lane just like their other customers... only worst for 
us.. think ESPN

Don't misunderstand me... I don't like the net neutrality as its being 
proposed, but I also don't want some services favored over others and forced 
to pay more the get them equal.

-Original Message- 
From: Matt Hoppes
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2014 4:05 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] [SPAM] "FCC Confirms Delay of New Net Neutrality Rules 
Until 2015"

Is there any more information on what exactly the FCC is proposing to
propose?  I know there was Title II thrown around

How would that impact us, or any other carrier?  Net neutrality is about
giving all packets equal access -- if I already do that, do I have
anything to fear?

I for one would love to see Net neutrality fall on its face, the big
ISPs start throtteling traffic, and just have customers driven to us
little guys who don't throttle.

On 11/11/14, 8:33 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote:
> from:
> http://tech.slashdot.org/story/14/11/11/2345213/fcc-confirms-delay-of-new-net-neutrality-rules-until-2015
>
> "/The Federal Communications Commission will abandon
> <http://www.dailydot.com/politics/net-neutrality-fcc-tom-wheeler-delayed-obama/>
>  
> its earlier
> promise
> <https://www.fcc.gov/blog/setting-record-straight-fcc-s-open-internet-rules> 
> to
> make a decision on new net neutrality rules this year. Instead, FCC
> Press Secretary Kim Hart said, "there will not be a vote on open
> internet rules on the December meeting agenda. That would mean rules
> would now be finalized in 2015." The FCC's confirmation of the delay
> came just as President Barack Obama launched a campaign
> <http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/11/10/statement-president-net-neutrality>
>  
> to
> persuade the agency to reclassify broadband Internet service as a public
> utility./Opensource.com is also running an interview with a legal
> advisor at the FCC
> <http://opensource.com/government/14/11/fcc-advisor-talks-net-neutrality>.
> He says, "There will be a burden on providers. The question is, 'Is that
> burden justified?' And I think our answer is 'Yes.'""
> -- 
>
> Josh Reynolds, Chief Information Officer
> SPITwSPOTS, www.spitwspots.com <http://www.spitwspots.com>
>
>
>
> ___
> Wireless mailing list
> Wireless@wispa.org
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless 

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Re: [WISPA] [SPAM] "FCC Confirms Delay of New Net Neutrality Rules Until 2015"

[Fred Goldstein]

On 11/12/2014 7:05 AM, Matt Hoppes wrote:
> Is there any more information on what exactly the FCC is proposing to
> propose?  I know there was Title II thrown around

There is no firm proposal.  Last week Tom let out a "trial baloon" 
suggesting that he'd adopt something based on the Mozilla proposal. That 
would leave all access providers vertically integrated and not subject 
to Title II on their access networks (so ISPs would not be allowed to 
buy raw DSL or cable modem service to compete with the wire owners' 
captive ISPs), but would treat peering and wholesale exchange of 
information between computers as Title II Common Carriage, subject to 
regulatory scrutiny.  This is of course ridiculous on its face, 
especially if you're familiar with Title 47 itself and its legislative 
history.  Essentially they're saying that pi=3, except on Tuesdays when 
it's marked down to 2.97.

> How would that impact us, or any other carrier?  Net neutrality is about
> giving all packets equal access -- if I already do that, do I have
> anything to fear?

If you do that, you probably have to fear congestion collapse first.  If 
you buy upstream from a single provider, no peering of your own, you're 
probably outside of the scope of that proposal.  If you have an ASN, 
things could get very weird indeed.

I see the proposal as clearly flawed legally.  So do Verizon and I think 
Comcast.  It's appeal bait.  This is politics -- there's political 
pressure to do something about a visible non-problem (the Internet 
itself is unregulated, so it obviously *must* be under intense attack by 
"cable f*ckery"), and other political pressure to not do anything about 
a less visible problem (lack of competition). So it will go back to 
court and probably get overturned after the next election.  Just like 
last time.  Lather, rinse, repeat.

Obama's proclamation doesn't mean anything either.  Tom is his political 
appointee.  Now as it happened, Tom screwed up big time, has fallen and 
he can't get up.  So Obama was basically trying to politically undo the 
damage, giving Tom an excuse to walk back his plan.

If you saw Steve's & my talk on NN at WISPAPALOOZA, you'll know how 
complicated this can be. My own position is that Title II should be 
applied to the lowest-layer offerings of rivalrous facility owners 
(ILEC, cable, CMRS) but not ISPs per se, or WISPs (non-rivalrous 
frequency users).  The "internet" concept dates back to 1972 (invented 
in France!) and separates the "network" (what carriers provide) from the 
"internetwork".  The trouble is, we've lost a layer and the internet and 
network layers are usually merged. That's broken. IP is being used as a 
network when it was meant to be an internetwork.

> I for one would love to see Net neutrality fall on its face, the big
> ISPs start throtteling traffic, and just have customers driven to us
> little guys who don't throttle.
>
> On 11/11/14, 8:33 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote:
>> from:
>> http://tech.slashdot.org/story/14/11/11/2345213/fcc-confirms-delay-of-new-net-neutrality-rules-until-2015
>>
>> "/The Federal Communications Commission will abandon
>> 
>>  its earlier
>> promise
>>  
>> to
>> make a decision on new net neutrality rules this year. Instead, FCC
>> Press Secretary Kim Hart said, "there will not be a vote on open
>> internet rules on the December meeting agenda. That would mean rules
>> would now be finalized in 2015." The FCC's confirmation of the delay
>> came just as President Barack Obama launched a campaign
>> 
>>  to
>> persuade the agency to reclassify broadband Internet service as a public
>> utility./Opensource.com is also running an interview with a legal
>> advisor at the FCC
>> .
>> He says, "There will be a burden on providers. The question is, 'Is that
>> burden justified?' And I think our answer is 'Yes.'""
>> -- 
>>
>> Josh Reynolds, Chief Information Officer
>> SPITwSPOTS, www.spitwspots.com 
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Wireless mailing list
>> Wireless@wispa.org
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
> ___
> Wireless mailing list
> Wireless@wispa.org
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>


-- 
  Fred R. Goldstein  k1iofred "at" interisle.net
  Interisle Consulting Group
  +1 617 795 2701

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Re: [WISPA] [SPAM] "FCC Confirms Delay of New Net Neutrality Rules Until 2015"

[Matt Hoppes]

Is there any more information on what exactly the FCC is proposing to
propose?  I know there was Title II thrown around

How would that impact us, or any other carrier?  Net neutrality is about
giving all packets equal access -- if I already do that, do I have
anything to fear?

I for one would love to see Net neutrality fall on its face, the big
ISPs start throtteling traffic, and just have customers driven to us
little guys who don't throttle.

On 11/11/14, 8:33 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote:
> from:
> http://tech.slashdot.org/story/14/11/11/2345213/fcc-confirms-delay-of-new-net-neutrality-rules-until-2015
> 
> "/The Federal Communications Commission will abandon
> 
>  its earlier
> promise
>  
> to
> make a decision on new net neutrality rules this year. Instead, FCC
> Press Secretary Kim Hart said, "there will not be a vote on open
> internet rules on the December meeting agenda. That would mean rules
> would now be finalized in 2015." The FCC's confirmation of the delay
> came just as President Barack Obama launched a campaign
> 
>  to
> persuade the agency to reclassify broadband Internet service as a public
> utility./Opensource.com is also running an interview with a legal
> advisor at the FCC
> .
> He says, "There will be a burden on providers. The question is, 'Is that
> burden justified?' And I think our answer is 'Yes.'""
> -- 
> 
> Josh Reynolds, Chief Information Officer
> SPITwSPOTS, www.spitwspots.com 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Wireless mailing list
> Wireless@wispa.org
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

[WISPA] [SPAM] "FCC Confirms Delay of New Net Neutrality Rules Until 2015"

[Josh Reynolds]

from: 
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/14/11/11/2345213/fcc-confirms-delay-of-new-net-neutrality-rules-until-2015


"/The Federal Communications Commission will abandon 
itsearlier 
promise 
to 
make a decision on new net neutrality rules this year. Instead, FCC 
Press Secretary Kim Hart said, "there will not be a vote on open 
internet rules on the December meeting agenda. That would mean rules 
would now be finalized in 2015." The FCC's confirmation of the delay 
came just as President Barack Obamalaunched a campaign 
to 
persuade the agency to reclassify broadband Internet service as a public 
utility./Opensource.com is alsorunning an interview with a legal advisor 
at the FCC 
. 
He says, "There will be a burden on providers. The question is, 'Is that 
burden justified?' And I think our answer is 'Yes.'""

--

Josh Reynolds, Chief Information Officer
SPITwSPOTS, www.spitwspots.com 

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless