[112501] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: DPI or Flow Management
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Lorell Hathcock)
Sun Mar 1 11:33:50 2009
From: "Lorell Hathcock" <lorell@hathcock.org>
To: "'nanog list'" <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <E6B47F7D-C5C7-4742-94F4-6CFD128DED15@menards.ca>
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 10:32:42 -0600
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Francois:
Should your email have also included a French interpretation as well?
Sincerely,
Lorell Hathcock
-----------------------------------------------------
Francois :=20
Votre email devrait-il avoir =E9galement inclus une interpr=E9tation =
fran=E7aise
aussi bien ?=20
Sinc=E8rement,=20
Lorell Hathcock
-----Original Message-----
From: Francois Menard [mailto:francois@menards.ca]=20
Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2009 3:51 PM
To: nanog list
Subject: DPI or Flow Management
The Coalition of Internet Service Providers has filed a substantial =20
contribution at the CRTC stating:
1) The CRTC should forbid DPI, as it cannot be proven to be 98.5% =20
effective at trapping P2P, such as to guarantee congestion relief
2) The CRTC should allow for other forms of traffic management by =20
ISPs, such as Flow Management
http://www.crtc.gc.ca/public/partvii/2008/8646/c12_200815400/1029835.zip
This is part of the public record at the following address:
http://www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/eng/2008/8646/c12_200815400.htm
The world will see Canada taking head-on the issue of addressing the =20
legitimacy of DEEP PACKET INSPECTION as a mean of properly managing an =20
incumbent's network behind the unbundling/peering interface.
NANOG cannot pretend that this debate does not take place and remain =20
silent on this.
Best regards,
F.
--
Fran=E7ois D. M=E9nard
francois@menards.ca
