Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

Comment: Re:The Rules (Score 1) 347

by TheSync (#49247665) Attached to: FCC Posts Its 400-Page Net Neutrality Order

The rule only says that ISPs have to transit traffic without differentiating between it.

Paid caches aren't network transit. They're not affected by this rule.

Moreover,

47 CFR 8.9 "(a) A person engaged in the provision of broadband Internet access service, insofar as such person is so engaged, shall not engage in paid prioritization.

(b) âoePaid prioritizationâ refers to the management of a broadband providerâ(TM)s network to directly or indirectly favor some traffic over other traffic, including through use of techniques such as traffic shaping, prioritization, resource reservation, or other forms of preferential traffic management, either (a) in exchange for consideration (monetary or otherwise) from a third party, or (b) to benefit an affiliated entity."

Comment: Re:The Rules (Score 1) 347

by TheSync (#49247645) Attached to: FCC Posts Its 400-Page Net Neutrality Order

The rule only says that ISPs have to transit traffic without differentiating between it.

Paid caches aren't network transit. They're not affected by this rule.

The rules say:

47 CFR 8.7 "A person engaged in the provision of broadband Internet access service, insofar as such person is so engaged, shall not impair or degrade lawful Internet traffic on the basis of Internet content, application, or service, or use of a non-harmful device, subject to reasonable network management."

Your word "transit" does not appear.

Comment: Not clear what this means (Score 1) 347

by TheSync (#49244815) Attached to: FCC Posts Its 400-Page Net Neutrality Order

"shall not impair or degrade lawful Internet traffic on the basis of Internet content, application, or service"

So if TCP stacks on my middle boxes obey TCP bandwidth throttling rules, but (of course) let through UDP packets unthrottled, have I degraded lawful Internet traffic on the basis of Internet application or service?

Comment: Re:Uncertainty? (Score 1) 347

by TheSync (#49244703) Attached to: FCC Posts Its 400-Page Net Neutrality Order

Does this sound like a "certain" rule to you?

"Mechanism to Resolve Traffic Exchange Disputes. As discussed, Internet traffic exchange agreements have historically been and will continue to be commercially negotiated. We do not believe that it is appropriate or necessary to subject arrangements for Internet traffic exchange (which are subsumed within broadband Internet access service) to the rules we adopt today. We conclude that it would be premature to adopt prescriptive rules to address any problems that have arisen or may arise.
It is also premature to draw policy conclusions concerning new paid Internet traffic exchange arrangements between broadband Internet access service providers and edge providers, CDNs, or backbone services. While the substantial experience the Commission has had over the last decade with "last-mile" conduct gives us the understanding necessary to craft specific rules based on assessments of potential harms, we lack that background in practices addressing Internet traffic exchange. For this reason, we adopt a case-by-case approach, which will provide the Commission with greater experience. Thus, we will continue to monitor traffic exchange and developments in this market."

Comment: Re:Not in Germany (Score 1) 130

by TheSync (#49083379) Attached to: Torvalds: "People Who Start Writing Kernel Code Get Hired Really Quickly"

Now 5 years have passed where I resigned from my job and from then on depend on germans wellfare system.

I wasn't hired anymore. No one want's my knowledge and no one wants to hire a "foreigner" (my parents are migrants).

Too bad it is so hard to immigrate to the USA! We are all migrants here.

Comment: The details (Score 2) 65

by TheSync (#49080885) Attached to: BBC Radio Drops WMA For MPEG-DASH

Based on this post, it looks like the BBC radio audio stream is encoded at a constant rate of 320 kbps using AAC-LC, delivered in the MPEG DASH container, and implemented in HTML5 using Media Source Extensions (MSE).

It is not clear to me if the BBC radio audio is being carried in MPEG DASH as MPEG-4 file format fragments or as an MPEG-2 Transport Stream, but I would suspect for audio-only it is MPEG-4 file format fragments.

Comment: Re:Well damn (Score 1) 379

by TheSync (#48983167) Attached to: Confirmed: FCC Will Try To Regulate Internet Under Title II

How does ensuring that corporations don't prioritize Internet traffic (and unfairly disenfranchise startups and direct competitors) get the government more involved in your life?

Because there is no way to prove traffic prioritization and this will simply benefit the incumbent providers who have better government connections, while providing zero consumer benefit. Competition will be hampered, not improved.

Comment: Finally the government has full control of the Net (Score 0) 379

by TheSync (#48981503) Attached to: Confirmed: FCC Will Try To Regulate Internet Under Title II

Well "net neutrality" nuts, you finally have eroded all of the efforts we pushed in the 1990's to keep government hands off of the Internet.

There many other ways this could have been avoided (such as requiring municipalities to grant franchise rights to new last-mile ISP entrants, for instance), but now the Federal government is in charge.

Lest people in other countries think you are immune, you should well know that the US Federal government will basically put its rules on the entire planet.

I hope you will be happy with the results!

Comment: Re:Lawrence Lessig on this (Score 2) 495

by TheSync (#48936727) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: When and How Did Europe Leapfrog the US For Internet Access?

Regardless of who owned the local loop or who sold service on it, US local loop lengths are longer than most other countries (regardless of population density).

I believe the long local loops relates to a massive central office "centralization" in the US when digital switching came along. Why exactly this centralization did not happen in Europe (and Australia) is not clear to me, it might have involved timing of DSS deployment versus the timing of DSL practicality.

The result is that the US has fewer COs, and longer local loops. Worked fine for voice, not so well for DSL.

Comment: LTE Multicast (Score 2) 98

by TheSync (#48933993) Attached to: Canada Upholds Net Neutrality Rules In Wireless TV Case

I believe "Bell Mobile TV" was a unicast IP service, but we know that Verizon and AT&T are planning roll-outs of LTE Multicast in the US, which is a very different beast.

Would it still be against "net neutrality" to allow carriers to serve up specially priced content on LTE Multicast, or would they have to make LTE Multicast available to all content providers equally? And how does one actually do that (given that the Internet, in general, has failed miserably at getting "general access" multicast routing to work)?

"What is wanted is not the will to believe, but the will to find out, which is the exact opposite." -- Bertrand Russell, _Sceptical_Essays_, 1928

Working...