[ NNSquad ] Re: Comments on NNSquad Purpose

["David P. Reed" <dpreed@reed.com>]

Brett-

This list and NNSquad's purpose is not about defining "network 
neutrality", nor is it required to.   Instead, all you have to do is 
read the web page at nnsquad.org to see the purpose - as stated, it is 
for incident reporting, detection tools, etc. related to 
anticompetitive, discriminatory, etc. practices.  In other words, 
developing and presenting the cases where some or many customers might 
view the behavior as undesirable.  YMMV.

If some don't feel such behaviors by ISPs and others are undesirable, 
that's fine.  The evidence may turn out to be unconvincing, to those who 
share that view.  But the evidence will be factual and lead to 
investigations and analysis, and perhaps even have an effect on 
policymakers.

It would seem to me that this list will be unrewarding for those who 
have the preconceived notion that ISPs can do anything they want with 
"their" pipes.  But there are no secrets here.  In fact, if such ISPs 
want to contribute tools and data about how they *do* effect 
discriminatory actions against their users' traffic, I'm sure their 
users and government regulators would be happy for such data to be 
voluntarily contributed by the ISPs - it saves a lot of detective work, 
and eliminates controversy by stipulating the truth of such discrimination.

Consumer Reports is always happy when companies voluntarily do product 
recalls and correct their products' defects.  ISPs are welcome to do the 
same.

Brett Glass wrote:
> By the way, it seems to me that the first order of business on this
> list should be to define "network neutrality." I see network neutrality
> as remaining neutral with regard to content providers, but not
> necessarily with regard to applications. (There are good technical
> reasons to do things like prioritize VoIP packets, for example.)
>
>