Re: [Arch-econ] Vint an interview you did with me in 1997 is being quoted on Nanog as reason to support the current so callednet neutrality bill

[Blaine Christian]

On Nov 11, 2005, at 10:43 AM, Gordon Cook wrote:

> thank you Vint.
>
> folks please note Vint's remarks on common carriage.  This stuff  
> gets very complicate very fast and i do not have it all at the tip  
> of my tongue by any means.  Vint did engage with Fred Goldstein,  
> Andrew Odlyzko, David Isenberg and others in a discussion of this  
> about 3 weeks ago.
>
> Please note also Vint's remark:
>
> > If ISPs were to inspect packets and interfere with those of  
> > competing application providers (voice, video), I would consider  
> > that a violation of the principle of network neutrality.
> I  have NOT been reading this bill carefully myself
> dangerous i know.  BUT if i understand it correctly this is  
> precisely what this bill would allow and this is NOT I think what  
> any of us want.  For whatever my opinion is worth I hope you all   
> will oppose this loud and clear.
Gordon, from what I read the "interfere" part was specifically called  
out in the Bill...

I have probably missed some of the "gotcha's".   Do you have the  
sections where BITS providers will be allowed to interfere/inspect?   
The inspect part does not appear to be referenced.

Here is the section I am talking about...

---snip-----

SEC. 104. ACCESS TO BITS.
(a) DUTIES OFPROVIDERS.—Subject to subsection2
(b), each BITS provider has the duty—3
(1) not to block, impair, or interfere with the4
offering of, access to, or the use of any lawful con-5
tent, application, or service provided over the Inter-6
net;7

--end snip----