- Original Message -
From: George Rogato [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 7:48 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Save the Internet (Net Neutrality)
While I agree with the basic concept of net neutrality, I wonder what
will happen
General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Save the Internet (Net Neutrality)
Content is supposed to get a free ride since we all sell data pipes. If
a customer buys 1 meg of data service from me then they are free to use
that 1 meg for whatever they want. If that isn't enough bandwidth for
what they want
-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matt Liotta
Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 12:28 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Save the Internet (Net Neutrality)
It is? IIRC, the tariff price of 1.5 meg DSL from BellSouth is $23.95.
-Matt
Charles Wu wrote
Matt,
Sounds like legislators or reading maketing advertisements instead of
acceptable use policies and fine print of broadband contracts.
What makes you come to that conclusion?
Well... you can't make Net Neutrality Laws without considering how ISPs
would be capable of technically
Charles Wu wrote:
But that's just the last mile local loop -- what about the ATM DS-3 circuit
coming back (and so forth)
Then there's servicing costs / etc
I was simply responding to your statement regarding just the last mile
transport. If you want to include other considerations in the
Tom DeReggi wrote:
The difference here is that you currently appear to offer adequate QOS
on your network design to offer a better Quality service. Many WISPs
do NOT. Because they went after a different market that did not
require it. And many of them will likely not beable to upgrade their
Charles,
Many do indeed :)
- Peter
Charles Wu wrote:
But that's just the last mile local loop -- what about the ATM DS-3 circuit
coming back (and so forth)
Then there's servicing costs / etc
Keep in mind -- Bell copper has been amortized for quite a long time now --
and has been installed
What tariff rate? DSL is unregulated and de-tariffed.
It is also subsidized by voice services, since it uses the same copper
pair.
Billing is miniscule (less than $1) because you already get a bill.
Their IP and ATM combined cost is less than $2 per subscriber.
The real overhead is tech support
I was simply responding to your statement regarding just the last mile
transport. If you want to include other considerations in the discussion
then I don't understand your earlier email.
When considering net neutrality and its implications (e.g., allowing the TV
company to stream video over
According to Eric Lee, most of the 500+ members of Congress don't
understand any of this stuff, but have to write a bill that does. Hence,
do you really think that Congress or the FCC takes in to account the
difference between fiber and wireless? How about the cable system and
the PSTN? How
Charles Wu wrote:
When considering net neutrality and its implications (e.g., allowing the TV
company to stream video over your network) -- I'm am trying to point out
that it's not simply a matter of bandwidth from the tower to the customer,
but also the tower backbone all the way to your NOC
WE aren't going to be able to do anything. Do you have millions to
lobby this (one way or the other)? We will sit back and watch what
happens, just like we ALWAYS have to do.
The smaller WISPs have never influenced anything political. It's the big
players that make the changes.
Travis
Content is supposed to get a free ride since we all sell data pipes. If
a customer buys 1 meg of data service from me then they are free to use
that 1 meg for whatever they want. If that isn't enough bandwidth for
what they want then they better buy more. Over time will the customer be
able to
RapidDSL Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
- Original Message -
From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2006 9:45 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Save the Internet (Net Neutrality)
Content is supposed to get a free
Very powerful statement!!!
Jory Privett
WCCS
- Original Message -
From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2006 10:43 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Save the Internet (Net Neutrality)
Well, that the big misunderstanding right
Jack,
I have not visited the site yet, and at your recommendation, I will explore
their content, to see if it is something that I would support or not.
However, if only 6 ISPs have signed, that could be a sign, that it may not
support our needs.
I believe in Freedom of Speech, but I also
Tom DeReggi wrote:
When someone sells 1 mbps of speed, who said that meant they are
selling the customer continuous 1 mbps for what ever use they want?
And just because we sell them a 1 mbps last mile, who says that we are
selling them that capacity accross our backbone network?
You may
Tom,
Random mixed thoughts:
When I buy a car or a sweater, I understand the tangible asset I have
paid for.
When I pay a toll on a highway, I understand that it is a tax for the
thru-way upkeep.
When I buy an internet pipe, I assume when they say 1.5M, I get 1.5M.
Anything else better be
After attending the Freedom to Connect conference, I was able to get a
very up close and personal look at the people who are strongly
supporting the Net Neutrality concepts. I believe that the intention
is to keep the status quo of the Internet, and make sure that we will
all be able to get
While I agree with the basic concept of net neutrality, I wonder what
will happen with IPTV-VOD and the stress it puts on a broadband
providers network.
If there is any application that I can think of that changes the rules
of net neutrality it would be IPTV. I understand some will say you
Hi,
The flip side is that you are selling a customer a connection. That is
how YOU are making your money... why do you care what they run over it?
Does it matter if it's IPTV or doing an FTP file transfer?
However, I really don't think this is going to affect the smaller
operators. This
It seems like it is time to bill by the packet.
Or at least by groups of packets as in 2 Gigs for $39.
Many clients don;t like this kind of billing, but it is likely the only
way you can do anything about IPTV.
If you have sold someone a 384k unmetered connection, and they decide to
If Google wants to be faster, let them buy more T-3s or more peering, or
whatever-don't screw with packet priority...
John
Travis Johnson wrote:
Hi,
The flip side is that you are selling a customer a connection. That is
how YOU are making your money... why do you care what they run over
23 matches
Mail list logo
