[IP] DAMN GOOD QUESTION Query on 'net neutrality' and IPv6
Begin forwarded message:
From: h_bray@xxxxxxxxx
Date: May 31, 2006 5:38:51 PM EDT
To: dave@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [IP] Query on 'net neutrality' and IPv6
Excellent question, and it cuts to the heart of my confusion about
this net
neutrality issue. I too worry about big companies exerting too much
influence over the Internet. But for years, technologists have added
features to IP networks to enable this kind of multi-tier service,
all the
while telling us that it would enable wonderful new services. So why is
this idea now supposed to be so dangerous?
Hiawatha Bray
David Farber
<dave@xxxxxxxxxx>
To
05/31/2006 04:44 ip@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
PM cc
Subject
Please respond to [IP] Query on 'net
neutrality' and
dave@xxxxxxxxxx IPv6
Begin forwarded message:
From: d f tweney <dylan@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: May 31, 2006 4:26:34 PM EDT
To: David Farber <dave@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Query on 'net neutrality' and IPv6
Dave--
A question for the IP community:
I'm no expert on Internet Protocol, but I do know that IPv6 includes
Quality of Service provisions that let routers prioritize some
packets relative to others, in order to ensure speedier delivery of,
say VoIP or video packets. Presumably, you could also use QoS to
prioritize packets from ISP A so they get through sooner than those
from ISP B.
Isn't that exactly what all the "net neutrality" folks are getting so
upset about? And if so, why aren't they protesting IPv6?
--
Dylan Tweney writer/editor
www.tweney.com dylan@xxxxxxxxxx
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as bray@xxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-
people/
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/