Welcome to NEFF

Sign up for a new account today, or log on with your old account!

Give us a try!

Welcome back to the new NEFF. Take a break from Twitter and Facebook. You don't go to Dicks for your fly fishing gear, you go to your local fly fishing store. Enjoy!

Net Neutrality

tomfly

The only thing left should be foot prints.
Why Obama’s plan to save the Internet could actually ruin it - The Washington Post

If you read the hype placed upon it. It is better then Sliced Bread. But that is not the case. As it stands now there are certain services that have priority over the Web (Digital Voice, Digital TV) The reason that they are is if they were not, the transmission latency would cause the conversation on your phone to sound choppy and you TV to become pixilated.

I have been in IT for 20 years now. I have grown into a position of A Network Administrator and I know how data flows from point A to point B.

I will try to explain how this works is simpler terms. Look at it this way; A Data packet as a Car on a highway each car has beginning point ( Its home) and a destination (place of work) the beginning point has an Address (123 my-street any-town any-state zip code ) and the destination has a similar address format. The same is true with a data packet. We all have sat in traffic during rush hour also true with data, so that is how date flows on the web.

Look at a data packet like this. IT could be voice, TV website, email… This information is too big to send all at once. So it is broken up into smaller packets and all packets have to be the same size. Explanation: let say you have 100 page document hypothetically. The post office says this too big for us to send all at once. So you put page one in one envelope page two in another envelope…… You send all 100 envelops. Now pages 1,5,50.65 92.83 get there on day one not the whole document and is lacking all the information. On day 2 the rest of the document arrives except page 60. The recipient says resend page 60 the next day page 60 arrives. Now the recipient can rebuild the document. This is exactly how data is transmitted across the Web but instead of days it is in micro seconds.

Let’s go back to cars on a highway. It is very congested. Here comes a voice packet ( let say a police car or fire truck , ambiance) all other cars on the highway move over to let it pass. The reasons that voice TV are prioritized; If it has any latency it can not function properly. The disassembly and rebuild of the packets have to be accomplished almost instantly or it can not work. That is why they have priority. What net neutrality states is no packet will have any priority. All data will be treated equal. This is the problem. TV and voice have to move fast to work properly. And there is the congestion on the web. A problem that will need to be addressed. Now the telecoms have to build bigger highways to fix the problems. This costs money. The only thing Net neutrality will do is increase the cost services to the customers.
 
Tom,

how do you know so much about so much stuff?
 
20 years experience and you miss the simple idea that you can only prioritize traffic on the segment of the network you own or control. Netflix or NBC/Universal/Comcast, AT$T or Bob's Teleconferencing Start Up cannot prioritize their packets on Verizon's network.

The internet and technology in general are the greatest forces for democratizing information and data since the printing press. Allowing those who can afford to pay for privileged access priority would be a huge step backwards and stifle innovation on a massive scale. I'd hate to have slow access to fishing reports and this fine site because Dennis doesn't want to pay every ISP for access to their customers. Power to the People. But if you want to go back to the days of very few companies having total control of all the information made available, the by all means stop net neutrality. You all know we have very few newspapers left, right?
 
I think Tomfly has the basic explanation correct but it's importsnt to understand the Internet is really an aggregation of multiple networks that are interconnected via public and private peering arrangements. It's fairly complex as its growth has been organic and cobbled together over time. The innovation that has been spawned as a result is phenomonal and yet we seem to be creating an issue where currently one doesn't exist. The proponents of net neutrality argue that we can't allow business to pick winners and losers. An argument that I would say is false on its face but let's asume for a moment that it's accurate. If so its fair to say that net neutrality is allowing the government to pick the winners and losers. Why is it bad for customers who want to pay more for a given service to be able to do so? We pay more for first class travel then coach. the governement can manage the impact through existing antitrust laws without actually implementing new regulations.

Why is it that this vote is taking place without any view of the proposed regulations. In order for the governemnt to enforce net neutrality it wil have to have access to the underlying networks which entails technology and monitoring which in turn costs money. Who will pay for these regulatory costs?

It's a foregone conclusion that this will happen but it should give eveyone pause that we haven't seen the plan ahead of the vote.
 
Relax. nothing to worry about. The government fixed health care and they will fix the internet
 
20 years experience and you miss the simple idea that you can only prioritize traffic on the segment of the network you own or control. Netflix or NBC/Universal/Comcast, AT$T or Bob's Teleconferencing Start Up cannot prioritize their packets on Verizon's network.

The internet and technology in general are the greatest forces for democratizing information and data since the printing press. Allowing those who can afford to pay for privileged access priority would be a huge step backwards and stifle innovation on a massive scale. I'd hate to have slow access to fishing reports and this fine site because Dennis doesn't want to pay every ISP for access to their customers. Power to the People. But if you want to go back to the days of very few companies having total control of all the information made available, the by all means stop net neutrality. You all know we have very few newspapers left, right?
Dude WTF I was trying to explain it as simple as possible. i was not writing a white paper on fiber node configuration or packet cashing on routers.
 
well it passed. It was vehemently opposed by cable and telecom companies. I know how much everyone loves Verizon, Comcast, TWC, AT&T, and Comcast. the people should be happy htse much loved companies did not get their way......yet.

Not trying to piss off the other Tom. I just though it was a pretty important distinction to make that you can't prioritize traffic on networks you don't own.
 
well it passed. It was vehemently opposed by cable and telecom companies. I know how much everyone loves Verizon, Comcast, TWC, AT&T, and Comcast. the people should be happy htse much loved companies did not get their way......yet.

Not trying to piss off the other Tom. I just though it was a pretty important distinction to make that you can't prioritize traffic on networks you don't own.

Its all good, just don't cry when your porn doesn't download fast enough, or when The Daily Show keeps cutting in and out, with massive pixelation.
 
and you think trusting my porn and propaganda delivery to Comcast would be a good idea? What if they don't approve of my particular likes and dislikes? If you like the way internet has been run (with data neutral agreements) since the 1970s, you should be happy.

The whole idea of internet ownership is pretty interesting.

If Comcast (the most hated company in America) and the other net providers want to play by their own rules, they are free to separate themselves from the larger internet and provide a private non-peered network for their paying customers alone. This is a free and capitalist society after all and the can compete however they want.
 
well I guess all the great companies that provide internet access out of the goodness of their hearts will all take their balls and go home now. Then my porn will be pixelated if I am luck enough to get any. After the internet falls apart due to lack of profits on granted monopolies, I'll have to find a good ole Sears catalog I guess.
 
well I guess all the great companies that provide internet access out of the goodness of their hearts will all take their balls and go home now. Then my porn will be pixelated if I am luck enough to get any. After the internet falls apart due to lack of profits on granted monopolies, I'll have to find a good ole Sears catalog I guess.


Geeez Tom get with it...Victoria's Secret catalogues are the way to go these days....I mean, even National Geographic is more modern than a Sears catalogue...:)
 
Geeez Tom get with it...Victoria's Secret catalogues are the way to go these days....I mean, even National Geographic is more modern than a Sears catalogue...:)

Tompg I share your appreciation for the classics. This one's for you:

Retrospace: Catalogs #6: Catalog of Shame

By the way, all of you conservatives who buy into the "big government boogieman" conspiracy... you know, Obama's trying to turn America into Soviet Russia, yada yada yada...

Have you ever tried to cancel your cable service and return your box to Comcast? Have you ever tried to get customer service from those guys? It's the 21st century equivalent of waiting in a Soviet bloc breadline. And it's all courtesy of the private sector.

What I'm trying to say is that it doesn't make any sense at all for fans of unbridled capitalism and free markets and all those good things to root for telecom monopolies. Even if Obama's against them.

Sometimes the enemy of your enemy is not your friend.
 
well I guess all the great companies that provide internet access out of the goodness of their hearts will all take their balls and go home now. Then my porn will be pixelated if I am luck enough to get any. After the internet falls apart due to lack of profits on granted monopolies, I'll have to find a good ole Sears catalog I guess.

Far from it. Your post was original post indcated that you were concerned the lack of net neutrality would result in powerful companies defining what content would be throttled back. All net neutrality does is allow the governemnt to define who will get a pass and who will be held to account. The week precededing this vote the language (that we the public aren't allowed to see) was amended athe request of Google and a few select companies. Commissioner wheeler made the amendments. That tells you a few things. One some folks have had access to the language. The governemnt is amenAble to changing things for some but not all and ultimately the governemnt will have control.

Now the Internet has existed and thrived without this regulation since its inception. What urgent issue surfaced that made this a necessity.
 
Not trying to piss off the other Tom. I just though it was a pretty important distinction to make that you can't prioritize traffic on networks you don't own.

I'm not pissed at all...matter of fact I'm only reading this cause no one has posted a fishing report lately... carry on other tom
 
Tompg I share your appreciation for the classics. This one's for you:

Retrospace: Catalogs #6: Catalog of Shame

By the way, all of you conservatives who buy into the "big government boogieman" conspiracy... you know, Obama's trying to turn America into Soviet Russia, yada yada yada...

Have you ever tried to cancel your cable service and return your box to Comcast? Have you ever tried to get customer service from those guys? It's the 21st century equivalent of waiting in a Soviet bloc breadline. And it's all courtesy of the private sector.

What I'm trying to say is that it doesn't make any sense at all for fans of unbridled capitalism and free markets and all those good things to root for telecom monopolies. Even if Obama's against them.

Sometimes the enemy of your enemy is not your friend.


This post represents a complete misunderstanding of the issue at hand. It's really simple. If the regulations are beneficial for the consumer you would have seen them way ahead of the vote. Yes I have returned many cable boxes over the years. It's bee pretty painless but your mileage may vary.

The reality is you pay for differentiated services every day. From travel to restaurants to what package you want on your cable TV to what you pay for your mobile device and so on. Many of the innovative services that are being built to run over the Internet have realtime voice and/or video as major components of the offering. These services place significant demand on the underlying networks that deliver them. So it costs a good deal of money to stay ahead of that demand. It's naive to think that providers will bear that cost alone whil OTT players reap the benefits.
 
well it passed. It was vehemently opposed by cable and telecom companies. I know how much everyone loves Verizon, Comcast, TWC, AT&T, and Comcast. the people should be happy htse much loved companies did not get their way......yet.

Not trying to piss off the other Tom. I just though it was a pretty important distinction to make that you can't prioritize traffic on networks you don't own.

But in fact you can control it if you set up private peering or implement class of service marking for your traffic. Newer technologies like SDN and NFV will make this easier and automated.
 
Tompg you did not piss me off. I am an easy going guy. I know for a fact that all voice is prioritized all the way through. I can tell you this from experience.

10 years ago I worked for a company that had a contract to set Video on Demand and Voice over IP infrastructure for Comcast. My Job was to light up a OC192 ring to carry the data. I Installed Movas Networks (now owned by Nortel) Fiber optical Multiplexers, What was different about these Multiplexers at the time is they had the ability to run OC192 on each wavelength that it lit up.(Wave Division Multiplexing) state of the art technology at the time. The main node was at the “Head End” (where the satellite receivers are located) The data center was impressive 600,000 sq feet with thousands of fiber optic connections. No one could not enter the data center without Laser shielding for your eyes. The Mux I installed was a single strand fiber running single mode protocol. The main Mux was handed its data from a monster Juniper router ( a border gateway) had to cost a million dollars. It had ATM (Asynchronous Transfer Mode) connections to all the main carriers and Comcast handed one off to each of them. The Mux converted the data that was handed off from the router to the corresponding wavelengths. That is what I configured; each wave length was configured to a corresponding node address. It was a 500 mile ring with a node every 25 miles. Each node also acted as signal repeater.

This surprised me, I don’t shock easily. I would go out with the Comcast engineers to install the Fiber Muxs at each node. These nodes were in the most unlikely places you can imagine. We would open a man hole in a parking lot climb down the ladder and open a door to a Data center. We would dive down some dirt road along a cornfield open up a manhole and there is another one. I was shocked at the time where this stuff was. You could live right next door to one of these nodes and would never be aware that it was there. Anyway I would install a module in MUX at each node and configure it to filter out the wavelength that was assigned to. Then it and hand it off to the router. The router would send the data to a coax converter and then to the consumers. It would also add data to the wavelength repeat the rest signal and send it down the ring.
I got to know the Comcast engineers over the 8 months that I was on the project. These guys were sharp. Superior Intellect I learned a lot from these guys. They told me The Border gateway router hands off voice packets to the carriers that is prioritized and received voice packets that were prioritized from the carriers and if it was not that way ,QOS Quality of service could not be archived. It is a mutual agreement between the carriers.

On a funny note; The head end data center had a wall of TVs mounted on it. Every channel that Comcast delivered was displayed on that wall, Including every porno channel. I asked why the wall of TVs. The engineer said it is the fastest way to know if the feed is working. As far as the evil telecom carriers, none of this would work without them.
 
I'm not pissed at all...matter of fact I'm only reading this cause no one has posted a fishing report lately... carry on other tom

This will have no impact on my engineering department and our 26 million online subscribers.

Not so sure how it will impact an app I worked on.

But if anyone wants to argue the finer points of AV over IP solutions in a UDP environment, we can take this outside -- to the stream -- where you'll receive a severe beating.....not at fishing....you're probably all better at fishing than me....but AV over IP solutions...compression algorithms for adaptive bit-rate streaming....hq multicasting...

...even if you know what you're talking about you can't win an argument on NEFF.


....lololol.....

this is an edit...

now that i read tom's bio i feel like an ass.....
 
This will have no impact on my engineering department and our 26 million online subscribers.

Not so sure how it will impact an app I worked on.

But if anyone wants to argue the finer points of AV over IP solutions in a UDP environment, we can take this outside -- to the stream -- where you'll receive a severe beating.....not at fishing....you're probably all better at fishing than me....but AV over IP solutions...compression algorithms for adaptive bit-rate streaming....hq multicasting...

...even if you know what you're talking about you can't win an argument on NEFF.


....lololol.....

this is an edit...

now that i read tom's bio i feel like an ass.....

I'm your huckleberry

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xpj7o_kNJ48&autoplay=1
 
This will have no impact on my engineering department and our 26 million online subscribers.

Not so sure how it will impact an app I worked on.

But if anyone wants to argue the finer points of AV over IP solutions in a UDP environment, we can take this outside -- to the stream -- where you'll receive a severe beating.....not at fishing....you're probably all better at fishing than me....but AV over IP solutions...compression algorithms for adaptive bit-rate streaming....hq multicasting...

...even if you know what you're talking about you can't win an argument on NEFF.


....lololol.....

this is an edit...

now that i read tom's bio i feel like an ass.....

No one debated that voice runs over UDP and not TCP. TCP has too much over head for voice to work electively If a packet gets dropped the voice signaling is not effected. It When you talk about compression algorithms. They are not accomplished at the lower layers of The OSI model. But Net neutrality is. That is where the problems will occur.
 
Back
Top