Bell South wants to DESTROY the Internet

[iconoclastNYC]

Posted on Slashdot: http://slashdot.org/articles/05/12/01/203229.shtml?tid=95

Linked article:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/30/AR2005113002109.html

"A senior telecommunications executive at BellSouth, said yesterday that Internet service providers should be allowed to strike deals to give certain Web sites or services priority in reaching computer users, a controversial system that would significantly change how the Internet operates. Some say Small Firms Could Be Shut Out of Market Championed by BellSouth Officer. William L. Smith, chief technology officer for Atlanta-based BellSouth Corp., told reporters and analysts that an Internet service provider such as his firm should be able, for example, to charge Yahoo Inc. for the opportunity to have its search site load faster than that of Google Inc." Next up, well dressed men go door to door collecting their monthly "protection money". 'It sure would be tragic if your users started getting 1500ms ping times, wouldn't it mister dot com?'"

THIS IS HORRIBLE and everyone who uses the internet must pay attention to this and lobby Congress to turn the Internet into a common carrier so the people who own the pipes can't influence what goes thru them IN ANY WAY.

I know slippery slope arguments are frowned upon but if this goes thru it will open up a whole new world where the Internet is not free and open but rather an amalgam of walled off areas. This will limit the free expression of ideas and stifle innovation. There are already rumblings of big telcos blocking voice over IP (Skype, Vonage, etc) because it competes with their POTS services (Plain Old Telephone)

Telcom companies need to get it thru their head that they exist to provide a PIPE. Thats it. They can charge their customers for access to that pipe. They have no business controlling or manipulating what goes thru that pipe. Meaning...they can't give preference to a company who's willing to pay more. That's monkeying around with the pipe. There must be a hands-off policy.

Any telco that starts doing the thing this guy is talking about needs to be boycotted and any company that enters into any sort of preferential service agreement with said corporation needs to be boycotted. Congress/FCC should make these sorts of arrangements illegal.

[ixion]

1. IP is not currently implemented that way, so anything they would do

would be a 2nd tier solution, and would probably drive their users to other ISPs who weren't participating in such a bogus plan.

Now when IP6 is implemented, something like this would be more possible... but all the more reason to be cautious about supporting that upgrade. ;-)

[iconoclastNYC]

2. You think so?

Most people don't know how to get rid of spyware that bogs down thier computer so much that a lot of people actually go out and buy new hardware but you think that the majority of users are going to know enuf about this to put the blame on the ISP?

Sounds like you are drinking the Republican "free market solves all problems" cool-aid.

[ixion]

3. that's who they blame now if the site loads slowly

if Yahoo loads faster than Google, or vice versa, you're going to piss off one or the other set of users. People who use Yahoo are going to be happy and people who use google would be sad.
There would be no technical knowledge required, really. It's a hot button issue, and as such would be pervasive. All they would have to know is that BellSouth was purposely slowing down their net to make money.

Oh, and I don't drink rethug Kool-Aid® ;-)

[iconoclastNYC]

4. If one site loads slower than the other

They are going to blame the site that loads slowly.

"gosh MSN search loads fast, but Google doesn't. What's wrong with Google?"

I don't think you've processed what the CEO is proposing. And this is just the first step. Once they get this thru then they can say....you can't serve our users video unless you pay us a few.

They want to charge peopel who send things thru thier pipe because they are not content with the revenue they get from people who pay for thier access.

[ixion]

5. let'em try it, I say... I think it's a stupid idea

IMO. ;-)

[ixion]

6. Oh, and some of the stupidest people I've ever met were CEO's

so just cause he says it doesn't make it a good or wise idea, IMO.

[iconoclastNYC]

8. No you miss the point.

This is a first step. The Internet is a commons and these companies shouldn't be able to monkey with the traffic. That's a violation of everything the Internet stands for.

Think of what it would have been like if AT&T would have been able to charge telemarketers 10,000 for being able to use thier property to run a business. The only reason this didn't happen is because Congress didn't let them.

So the CEOs are smart enough to know they have to do this gradually to fly under the radar so that we don't demand that the Internet is protected from manipulation by the greedy telcos.

This is a trial balloon. We need to let them know that this will not stand.

[Don Claybrook]

7. Not sure what you mean about IP implementation

But QoS is a very stable and mature technology, so it wouldn't be at all difficult to rate limit the lower-paying customers.

And yeah, the whole thing is an assinine idea.

[ixion]

9. I just mean that current Internet Protocol is not designed to discriminate

in fact, it was specifically designed that way.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TCP/IP



Now, the application of QoS would be specific to BellSouth's network, or any network implementing this moron's idea. Applying it will only affect information that passes through these specific routers, but would not affect information that did not.

http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/cisintwk/ito_doc/qos.htm#1020570



That's all I was saying by IP impl. It's a moot point, though, since we both agree that it's a dumb idea. :-)