Deadline On FCC Net Neutrality Rules Closes Soon; Go Comment Now

The comment deadline to weigh in on the FCC's proposed rules on Network Neutrality is coming to a close on January 14th, 2010. Pro or con, if you care about network neutrality, you only have a few days left to file a comment with the FCC. For a refresher on the proposed rules, can read them here.

Admittedly, I am a proponent of the proposed rules. I think the rules, once they are in place, will go along way to ensure that consumers and businesses who rely on the Internet continue to enjoy fair and unfettered access to the servers and services we desire. For whatever reason, this particular issue is emotionally explosive, and frankly, some the arguments against the rules are just plain wrong.  

Is the FCC trying to regulate free speech? Yes. They are trying to create regulations that ensure that everyone, private person and business alike, has the ability to post opinions and expressions across the Internet without service providers hindering access -- and regardless of whether those opinions and expressions are in text, voice, video, or some other media. Isn't that what you want? Do you want a network service provider to interfere with or stop what you can do on the Internet?

The FCC's proposed ruling does not allow unlawful actions including terrorism, copyright infringement and other illegal activities to occur. It also does not stop service providers from employing reasonable network management practices to ensure fair and equitable quality of service to everyone.

The term "reasonable network management" has changed and will continue to change over time. The practices available today are different from the ones available 10 or 20 years ago. The key word is "reasonable." Network engineers know how protocols behave on the network.

The Internet is plenty fast enough, the choke point is often the "last mile" or the part of the network between where your service provider gets traffic onto its own backbone and your computer. Cable broadband users have suffered from the after-school effect where broadband connections slow down when the kids get home. I don't know what the traffic mix is, but reasonable network management practices would indicate shaping traffic to give preference to real-time media and slowing down bulk file transfers to give more space to other traffic.  Everyone connected to the Internet is already paying for that access. Information providers large and small pay fees usually based on capacity to host servers and consumers, like you and I pay to fixed fees to access the Internet and access the information providers. The service providers in the middle—those not directly connected to either customer— have pre-existing arrangements with each other to both pay for and receive payment for access. In some cases, service providers peer with each other where they carry each other's traffic for free because it is mutually beneficial to do so. Transit occurs when a tier 1 network provider charges a tier 2 or lower service provider to connect. The business model is already in place and companies are already getting paid to interconnect. If service providers aren't making enough money, then charge more and let the market decide what the cost of a service is. Just make it fair.

Unfortunately, many locations in the US are served by one, perhaps two, providers. That isn't enough to foster competition and unlike the PSTN, broadband providers are not required to wholesale their physical plant (something broadband providers fought and won in the 90's). There is little chance of real competition.

One of my colleagues pointed out the real motivation behind killing the proposed rules is that the wireless carriers are offering Internet enabled broadband phones. The wireless broadband industry is very much in the same place that the ISP industry was in the late 90's, with far more demand than they had capacity to meet. AT&T is feeling the pinch with iPhone users in major metropolitan areas complaining about poor wireless broadband. Go to any trade show and good luck checking Twitter from the floor. You can bet that carriers like AT&T, Sprint and T-Mobile, who have caps on their Internet access plans, are scared of what will happen in the coming years, now that Verizon Wireless's data plan on the Droid is uncapped (yes, there is no cap on the data plan that comes with the Droid. Read the user agreement). AT&T and others have indicated that 5Gb per month is above average use, but I just heard from an acquaintance who used 13.5 Gb  in December watching videos and listening to podcasts. I used a paltry 1.5 Gb in comparison.

The fact is, we are all paying for bandwidth. Service providers, as stewards of Internet connectivity, have a responsibility to provide equal access to Internet services. The FCC proposed rules aim to ensure that the Internet stays open.