[172403] in North American Network Operators' Group
BITAG Announces Next Technical Review on Interconnection
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Livingood, Jason)
Wed Jun 18 10:16:57 2014
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: "Livingood, Jason" <Jason_Livingood@cable.comcast.com>
To: "<nanog@nanog.org>" <nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 14:16:13 +0000
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
May be of interest to folks here
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Kaleb A. Sieh" <ksieh@bitag.org<mailto:ksieh@bitag.org>>
Subject: BITAG Announces Next Technical Review on Interconnection
Date: June 18, 2014 at 8:44:24 AM EDT
Today, the Broadband Internet Technical Advisory Group (BITAG) announced it=
s next technical review focused on the topic of Internet Network Interconne=
ction. This topic was submitted jointly by two of BITAG=92s members, Centur=
yLink and the Center for Democracy & Technology, and the review will result=
in a report with an anticipated publication date in November 2014.
The Internet is a complex =93network of networks=94 linked together in a va=
riety of ways and by a variety of technologies. In order for end users conn=
ected to one network to access data and services connected to another netwo=
rk, these networks must =93interconnect=94 with each other, either directly=
or indirectly. Internet network interconnection, also often referred to a=
s =93peering=94 or =93transit=94, is an increasingly important topic as the=
Internet ecosystem faces a dynamic growth period characterized by rapidly =
increasing demand, changing technologies and product offerings, and signifi=
cant shifts in data traffic patterns. But there is little public informatio=
n about Internet interconnection available to those not intimately involved=
with operating networks =96 including consumers, journalists and regulator=
s.
With this report, BITAG=92s Technical Working Group (TWG) aims to provide a=
n informative contribution to the ongoing discussion surrounding Internet n=
etwork interconnection. Some topics likely to be covered in the report inc=
lude: (1) the history of Internet network interconnection, along with a bri=
ef historical review of network interconnection in other industries and con=
texts; (2) how Internet traffic is managed between networks; and (3) the ev=
olving nature of Internet data traffic patterns.
Jason Weil, Principal Engineer at Time Warner Cable, and Joseph Lorenzo Hal=
l, Chief Technologist at the Center for Democracy & Technology, will be the=
lead editors of the report on this topic. Douglas Sicker, Executive Direct=
or of BITAG, Chair of BITAG=92s Technical Working Group, Department Head of=
Engineering and Public Policy and a professor of Computer Science at Carne=
gie Mellon University, and on leave from the University of Colorado Boulder=
, where he is an Endowed Professor of Computer Science and Telecommunicatio=
ns, will chair the review itself.
For more information on the topic, please see the attached press release =
=96 which is also available on the BITAG website at www.bitag.org<http://ww=
w.bitag.org/>.
Below is more info on BITAG and its structure/processes. Feel free to conta=
ct me with any questions, comments, or other needs.
Kind regards,
Kaleb
Kaleb A. Sieh
Deputy Director
House Counsel
Broadband Internet Technical Advisory Group (BITAG)
ksieh@bitag.org<mailto:ksieh@bitag.org>
________________________________
About BITAG. BITAG is a non-profit, multi-stakeholder organization focused =
on bringing together engineers and technical experts in a Technical Working=
Group (TWG) to develop consensus on broadband network management practices=
and other related technical issues that can affect users' Internet experie=
nce, including the impact to and from applications, content and devices tha=
t utilize the Internet.
* Mission. BITAG's mission includes: (a) educating policymakers on such=
technical issues; (b) addressing specific technical matters in an effort t=
o minimize related policy disputes; and (c) serving as a sounding board for=
new ideas and network management practices. Specific TWG functions can inc=
lude: (i) identifying "best practices" by broadband providers and other ent=
ities; (ii) providing technical guidance to industry and to the public; and=
/or (iii) issuing advisory opinions on the technical issues that may under=
lie disputes concerning broadband network management practices.
* BITAG Reports. BITAG TWG reports focus primarily on technical issues,=
especially those with the potential to be construed as anti-competitive, d=
iscriminatory, or otherwise motivated by non-technical factors. While the =
reports may touch on a broad range of questions associated with a particula=
r network management practice, the reports are not intended to address or a=
nalyze in a comprehensive fashion the economic, legal, regulatory or public=
policy issues that the practice may raise.
About BITAG's Technical Review Process. BITAG's core substantive work is pe=
rformed through its Technical Working Group (TWG), which was formed with th=
e core principles of being: technically driven, balanced, open, efficient, =
independent, and flexible. The TWG reviews technical issues brought to it t=
hrough Review Requests submitted by both Members and non-Members, or throug=
h a majority vote of the TWG engineers themselves.
* Committees. Each individual technical review is taken up by a committ=
ee of the TWG that is composed of engineers and other technical experts rep=
resenting a broad cross section of the Internet ecosystem.
* Consensus-based. TWG committees operate on a consensus-basis, with ba=
lanced backstop voting procedures so that when consensus cannot be achieved=
, each Member category has an equal say in the work product regardless of t=
he composition of the committee.
* Expeditious =97 120-day "shot clock". BITAG was structured to work as=
expeditiously as possible, with each technical committee operating under a=
120-day "shot clock" during which the respective technical review and repo=
rt must be completed.
