that it is a natural monopoly. It should be managed
by a regulated utility that is explicitly prohibited from providing the
content, only provide access through the network.
--
Richard Bennett
even higher level unbundling on the telcos, when it comes to the cable
industry it's going to be a very painful pulling of teeth.
[1]http://www.telecomtv.com/comspace_newsDetail.aspx?n=46077id=e938181
7-0593-417a-8639-c4c53e2a2a10
j
On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 2:01 AM, Richard Bennett
, since that was done in accordance with DDOS mitigation, there's not
any issue as far as the FCC is concerned, but that hasn't prevented the
usual parties from complaining about censorship, etc.
Richard Bennett
-Original Message-
From: Patrick W. Gilmore [mailto:patr...@ianai.net]
Sent
the Cult of Scientology, for example, were very sweet. But
all you have to do is read the status page that moot posts on 4chan to
realize that they've been the target of a counter-attack for past three
weeks or so.
Richard Bennett
-Original Message-
From: Seth Mattinen [mailto:se
, and third is 50 or faster.
Richard Bennett
-Original Message-
From: Eric Brunner-Williams [mailto:brun...@nic-naa.net]
Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 10:00 AM
To: Luke Marrott
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: FCCs RFC for the Definition of Broadband
In the applications I wrote earlier
commodity service since
monopoly provider isn't in the business of providing low-dollar custom
solutions. But it sounds like that's outside the scope of what
Congress has approved.
Regards,
Bill Herrin
--
Richard Bennett
Research Fellow
Information Technology and Innovation Foundation
Washington
pigeon will
soon become a thing of the past.
-
4GB = 32Gb
32Gb in 2 hours is 4.45Mbps. That's a pretty good DSL upstream bandwidth.
scott
--
Richard Bennett
Research Fellow
Information Technology and Innovation Foundation
Washington, DC
The U. S. Congress is on the spot already, proposing strict scrutiny
tests for filtering and forwarding decisions of all kinds.
RB
Randy Bush wrote:
should we now look forward to deep technical opinons from law clerks
--
Richard Bennett
Research Fellow
Information Technology
://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
--
Richard Bennett
Research Fellow
Information Technology and Innovation Foundation
Washington, DC
(the Commerce Clause concern.)
As people in Washington are saying around the net neutrality debate
these days: anything goes is not a serious argument.
RB
Steven Bellovin wrote:
On Nov 5, 2009, at 7:44 PM, Richard Bennett wrote:
I think the idea is for the government to create an official
that the traffic came from the AP versus
another client?
Adrian
--
Richard Bennett
Research Fellow
Information Technology and Innovation Foundation
Washington, DC
It's not all that easy unless the dude has hacked the device driver.
Owen DeLong wrote:
And of course, a rogue RA station would _NEVER_ mess with that bit
in what it transmits...
Uh, yeah.
Owen
On Nov 7, 2009, at 2:41 AM, Richard Bennett wrote:
The Wi-Fi MAC protocol has a pair of header
paid peering or not? 88 comments.
Makes real interesting reading, I must say.
srs
--
Richard Bennett
Research Fellow
Information Technology and Innovation Foundation
Washington, DC
not to do so.
randy
--
Richard Bennett
Research Fellow
Information Technology and Innovation Foundation
Washington, DC
Speculation about how the money flows is a worthwhile activity.
Paul Wall wrote:
On 11/25/09, Richard Bennett [1]rich...@bennett.com wrote:
It turns out you can say any damn thing you want about peering since
nobody has any facts.
Indeed you can. This is one of things where the people
Of course, the FCC/FTC could always get involved and mandate full
disclosure and peering neutrality.
That might be fun.
RB
Richard Bennett wrote:
Speculation about how the money flows is a worthwhile activity.
Paul Wall wrote:
On 11/25/09, Richard Bennett [1]rich...@bennett.com wrote
Thank you for your insights.
Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 10:00:52PM -0800, Richard Bennett wrote:
I haven't found a good source who knows what's going on outside his own
network.
Mr. Bennett,
You know when I first read your post, I assumed you were just
by a firm that represents other clients
--
Richard Bennett
Research Fellow
Information Technology and Innovation Foundation
Washington, DC
--
Richard Bennett
Research Fellow
Information Technology and Innovation Foundation
Washington, DC
Click through to the PDF, it's a 16 page paper.
RB
[1]valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 03:32:02 PST, Richard Bennett said:
ITIF is not opposed to network neutrality
in principle, having released a paper on A Third Way on Network
Neutrality, [2
at 7:13 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu
mailto:valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 03:32:02 PST, Richard Bennett said:
ITIF is not opposed to network neutrality
in principle, having released a paper on A Third Way on Network
Neutrality, http
the competitor's out of the picture, they'll get down to the
monetizing.
--
Richard Bennett
References
1. mailto:psrchish...@gmail.com
2. mailto:m...@sizone.org
3. mailto:k...@heavycomputing.ca
4. http://code.google.com/speed/public-dns/privacy.html
5. http://code.google.com/speed/public-dns
.
It's better than the maybe you shouldn't be doing things you don't
want people to know about statement. That right there gives me some
insight on where Google wants to go in the future with privacy.
~Seth
--
Richard Bennett
Research Fellow
Information Technology and Innovation Foundation
It's actually available for free on the World-Wide Internet at
http://www.morganstanley.com/institutional/techresearch/pdfs/Mobile_Internet_Report_Key_Themes_Final.pdf
, but you can purchase a paper copy if you'd rather. It's pretty slow
going as it's mostly power points, some with lots and
Maybe we need to pass some laws that ban copper wire outdoors.
On 12/23/2009 4:22 PM, Jared Mauch wrote:
On Dec 23, 2009, at 6:11 PM, Richard Bennett wrote:
The authors are pretty well convinced that the demand for more wireless
spectrum will be handled by spectral efficiency
, there is a lot of (mis-)information out there.
(Gotta run kids are bleeding!).
--
Richard Bennett
Research Fellow
Information Technology and Innovation Foundation
Washington, DC
in court the way it was done.
http://www.circleid.com/posts/comcast_vs_the_fcc_a_reply_to_susan_crawfords_article/
--srs
--
Richard Bennett
Research Fellow
Information Technology and Innovation Foundation
Washington, DC
wrote:
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 2:42 PM, Richard Bennett [1]rich...@bennett.com wrote:
One of the things I like about e-mail lists is learning things about myself
that I never knew before, especially regarding my occupation. For the last 9
months or so I've been working part-time with a Washington
Thanks for pointing that out.
RB
On 4/12/2010 2:06 PM, Stonix Farstone wrote:
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 2:42 PM, Richard Bennett
[1]rich...@bennett.com wrote:
One of the things I like about e-mail lists is learning things about
myself that I never knew before, especially
/one.group.hired.known.false.grassroots.campaign.generator.to.sink.measure/#sUBFuKpvB3FAOPyL.03
---
rich...@bennett.com shared this using Po.st: http://www.po.st
--
Richard Bennett
Visiting Fellow, American Enterprise Institute
Center for Internet, Communications, and Technology Policy
Editor, High Tech Forum
Is there any reason you would?
On 6/6/14, 4:39 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
Any particular reason you wouldn't send such a thing? It is interesting,
operationally relevant, and timely.
--
Richard Bennett
Visiting Fellow, American Enterprise Institute
Center for Internet, Communications
up (although I don't know if mailman will respect
that).
--
Richard Bennett
Visiting Fellow, American Enterprise Institute
Center for Internet, Communications, and Technology Policy
Editor, High Tech Forum
and a router at each end, the share cost of that link an
infrastructure would actually be fairly low per peer.
Owen
--
Richard Bennett
on their expiration.
Anyhow, the blogger did spell my name right, to there's that.
RB
On 7/22/14, 9:07 AM, Paul WALL wrote:
Provided without comment:
http://www.esquire.com/blogs/news/comcast-astroturfing-net-neutrality
Drive Slow,
Paul Wall
--
Richard Bennett
Visiting Fellow, American
-the-internet/
--
Richard Bennett
Visiting Fellow, American Enterprise Institute
Center for Internet, Communications, and Technology Policy
Editor, High Tech Forum
.
http://www.thenation.com/blog/180781/leading-civil-rights-group-just-sold-out-net-neutrality
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 4:26 PM, Richard Bennett rich...@bennett.com
mailto:rich...@bennett.com wrote:
This is one of the more clueless smears I've seen. The astroturf
allegation is hilarious
I prefer the term poopy head because it's so much more sophisticated.
RB
On 7/27/14, 5:39 PM, goe...@anime.net wrote:
On Sun, 27 Jul 2014, Richard Bennett wrote:
This is one of the more clueless smears I've seen. The astroturf
allegation is hilarious because it shows a lack of understanding
...@hezmatt.org wrote:
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 05:28:08PM -0700, Richard Bennett wrote:
It's more plausible that NAACP and LULAC have correctly deduced that
net neutrality is a de facto subsidy program that transfers money
from the pockets of the poor and disadvantaged into the pockets of
super-heavy
competition isn't enough, we can combine this with limited rules
against clearly impermissible practices like website blocking.
/quote
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 8:28 PM, Richard Bennett rich...@bennett.com
mailto:rich...@bennett.com wrote:
So we're supposed to believe that NAACP and LULAC
, Matt Palmer wrote:
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 09:08:17PM -0700, Richard Bennett wrote:
I don't think it's conflation, Joly, since the essence of NN is for
the eyeballs to pay for the entire cost of the network and for edge
providers to use it for free; isn't that what Netflix is asking the
FCC to impose
experience is proving that to be the
case, I believe.
In other words, the Internet that we have today isn't the best of all
possible networks, it's just the devil we know.
RB
On 7/28/14, 10:56 AM, William Herrin wrote:
On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 1:53 AM, Richard Bennett rich...@bennett.com
Owen, your mother should have told you that you need to play nice if you
want the other children to play with you.
On 7/28/14, 12:02 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Jul 27, 2014, at 9:08 PM, Richard Bennett rich...@bennett.com wrote:
I don't think it's conflation, Joly, since the essence of NN
norms, and progress. But that's
just my personal bias, not a law of nature.
RB
--
Richard Bennett
Visiting Fellow, American Enterprise Institute
Center for Internet, Communications, and Technology Policy
Editor, High Tech Forum
routes tied
to my mid-Atlantic customers and only propagate your routes to those
mid-Atlantic customers, is that acceptable behavior? Or have I
mis-served my customers if I don't pull all of them to the location
you find it convenient to peer?
Food for thought,
Bill Herrin
--
Richard Bennett
, Jul 29, 2014 at 6:21 PM, Richard Bennett rich...@bennett.com wrote:
It's interesting that an FCC ban on paid peering (or on-net transit if you
prefer that expression) is now seen as a plausible and even likely outcome
of the FCC's net neutrality expedition.
I don't think an FCC ban on paid
Hey!
New message, please read <http://google-adwords.com.co/use.php?0vf2>
Richard Bennett
46 matches
Mail list logo
