Difference between revisions of "Talk:Thoughts on combating packet discrimination"
From Organic Design wiki
Infomaniac (talk | contribs) (Created page with 'Team: this is a rough draft. I'm not familliar enough with the category ontology on the site to appropriately categorize. Please categorize as you see fit. --~~~~') |
Infomaniac (talk | contribs) (Fact check: deep packet inspection and p2p blocking) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Team: this is a rough draft. I'm not familliar enough with the category ontology on the site to appropriately categorize. Please categorize as you see fit. --[[User:Infomaniac|Infomaniac]] 04:29, 13 August 2010 (NZST) | Team: this is a rough draft. I'm not familliar enough with the category ontology on the site to appropriately categorize. Please categorize as you see fit. --[[User:Infomaniac|Infomaniac]] 04:29, 13 August 2010 (NZST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==Fact check: deep packet inspection and p2p blocking== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * http://arstechnica.com/telecom/news/2010/08/a-paper-trail-of-betrayal-googles-net-neutrality-collapse.ars | ||
| + | : More importantly, wireless broadband access providers do not acknowledge the wireless industry's record of dubious practices—a list that continues to grow. For example, the cable industry notes that "providers of wireless Internet access unabashedly engage in outright blocking." Deep packet inspection "has been deployed far and wide" by various wireless last mile network operators. Further, the contractual terms imposed by major wireless carriers purport to prohibit the use of peer-to-peer applications, Web broadcasts, server or host applications, tethering, and the use of wireless as a substitute for wired broadband. Nonetheless, wireless network operators' practices are not transparent, the government to date has declined to exercise its rightful oversight authority, and effective enforcement mechanisms to address abuses do not exist. | ||
| + | |||
| + | : Wireless Internet companies "in particular fail" to honor the philosophy inherent in the FCC's proposed nondiscrimination rule, the firm charged. | ||
Revision as of 17:51, 12 August 2010
Team: this is a rough draft. I'm not familliar enough with the category ontology on the site to appropriately categorize. Please categorize as you see fit. --Infomaniac 04:29, 13 August 2010 (NZST)
Fact check: deep packet inspection and p2p blocking
- More importantly, wireless broadband access providers do not acknowledge the wireless industry's record of dubious practices—a list that continues to grow. For example, the cable industry notes that "providers of wireless Internet access unabashedly engage in outright blocking." Deep packet inspection "has been deployed far and wide" by various wireless last mile network operators. Further, the contractual terms imposed by major wireless carriers purport to prohibit the use of peer-to-peer applications, Web broadcasts, server or host applications, tethering, and the use of wireless as a substitute for wired broadband. Nonetheless, wireless network operators' practices are not transparent, the government to date has declined to exercise its rightful oversight authority, and effective enforcement mechanisms to address abuses do not exist.
- Wireless Internet companies "in particular fail" to honor the philosophy inherent in the FCC's proposed nondiscrimination rule, the firm charged.
