- Microsoft Windows chief decries standards grandstanding
- The 5 best, and 5 worst, features of Google Chrome OS
- Federal government using PS3 to crack pedophile passwords
- 10G Ethernet cheat sheet
- Top 10 free Windows tools for IT pros, at a glance
As the old adage goes, "Be careful what you wish for — you might get it, and wish you hadn't." Proponents of net neutrality might want to keep that in mind now that net neutrality regulations from either the FCC, Congress or both are a virtual certainty.
As with most wishes the impulse behind this one is laudable. As FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski puts it, the goal is "to ensure the Internet remains a free and open platform that promotes innovation, investment, competition, and users' interests." Amen!
More specifically, the idea is to ensure that penniless entrepreneurs have the same ability to reach audiences as do multi-billion-dollar companies, and that providers can't censor content (whether by competitors or users expressing First Amendment-protected views).
Interestingly, both conditions largely prevail in the Internet today. Yes, there are a few well-publicized cases of content censorship -- but the vast majority of the time, the Internet actually is net neutral.
Unfortunately, by imposing legislation designed to keep things that way, net neutrality proponents run a real risk of destroying the very Internet they want to protect.
Here's why: Internet usage continues to grow dramatically -- between 50% and 100% year over year. That's not a problem in the core, which has more capacity than it needs for the foreseeable future. But access circuits (both wired and wireless) are bandwidth-constrained -- and excruciatingly expensive to upgrade (ask Verizon how much it has spent on FiOS). Net neutrality prohibits carriers from recouping those costs by charging differentially based on type of content or quality of service.
That means as user demand increases, carriers have just one option for recouping their costs: Charge by the bit. And that, in turn, will have a domino effect on peering arrangements. Tier-one providers now peer for free with each other. Once they have no choice but to charge for bandwidth, free peering will go away. And one of two things will happen then -- both unpleasant. Either user costs go up (to cover the costs of peering), or more likely, carriers won't bother to peer in the first place (because they can't charge users enough to recoup the costs of peering).
Guess what? When peering goes away, so does the Internet -- because you're no longer able to connect to anywhere from anywhere. A site on one network won't be visible to users on other networks, unless the site owner is rich enough to buy connections to multiple networks.
Learn how to simplify your branch infrastructure while dramatically increasing app performance with Citrix Branch Repeater.
Free Guide: "Next Gen Load Balancing: 8 Things You Need to Handle Today's Network Traffic" shows you the functionality needed in your next load balancer.
Free Guide: "The Secret to Getting Maximum Speed from your Web Applications."' Learn how you can deliver Web apps up to 5x faster.
Partner Content
Simplify Your Branch Infrastructure
Learn how to simplify your branch infrastructure while dramatically increasing app performance with Citrix Branch Repeater.
Download the Free Info Kit
Next-Gen Load Balancing
Free Guide: "Next Gen Load Balancing: 8 Things You Need to Handle Today's Network Traffic" shows you the functionality needed in your next load balancer.
Download the Free Guide
Accelerate Your Web Apps by up to 5x
Free Guide: "The Secret to Getting Maximum Speed from your Web Applications."' Learn how you can deliver Web apps up to 5x faster.
Download the Free Guide
Comments (8)
Why is charging by the bit the only option? What about tiered speed levels, as is done today with DSL and cable? Or, how aboutBy jetboys on October 1, 2009, 11:28 pmWhy is charging by the bit the only option? What about tiered speed levels, as is done today with DSL and cable? Or, how about creating an outside plant monopoly...
Reply | Read entire comment
Johna - good thoughts, andBy Anon on October 6, 2009, 1:09 pmJohna - good thoughts, and they almost seem too scary to not come true. For Jetboy's idea of a last-mile monopoly. Sounds like a great idea. Pick some company....
Reply | Read entire comment
I question one of the assumptionsBy djdawson on October 6, 2009, 6:22 pmI'm not sure I agree with the assumption that the core networks of the typical backbone provider has more than enough capacity for the foreseeable future. Pretty...
Reply | Read entire comment
Hypothetical penniless entrepreneurBy Brad Reese on October 11, 2009, 4:07 pmWith net neutrality, the "hypothetical penniless entrepreneur" has the potential to someday OWN Verizon as well as AT&T customers should Verizon/AT&T "drop-the-ball." American...
Reply | Read entire comment
When ever the Gov't gets involvedBy Anonymous on October 12, 2009, 2:50 pmThey turn a good thing into an expensive mess.
Reply | Read entire comment
Doomsaying without a shred of evidence...By GooRu on October 13, 2009, 1:59 pmCarriers and ISPs ALREADY charge based on bandwidth. Nothing will change. It is not in their best interest to kill the Internet, so it can't happen. Net Neutrality...
Reply | Read entire comment
View all comments