[186333] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Binge On! - And So This is Net Neutrality?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mike Hale)
Thu Dec 10 14:43:29 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <20151210193225.GA31851@cmadams.net>
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 11:40:23 -0800
From: Mike Hale <eyeronic.design@gmail.com>
To: "NANOG Operators' Group" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
You already have the ability to pay for faster service.
NN prevents the carrier from then going to the shipper and extorting
further money to deliver the same package.
On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 11:32 AM, Chris Adams <cma@cmadams.net> wrote:
> Once upon a time, Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com> said:
>> On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 1:07 PM, William Kenny
>> <william.r.kenny@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > is that still net neutrality?
>>
>> who cares? mobile was excepted from the NN rulings.
>
> Any why the desire for extra regulation for Internet services?
>
> Shippers (you know, actual Common Carriers) do things like this all the
> time, especially when they are busy (congested). I had a package ship
> Tuesday; it sat at the receiving location for 24 hours before the first
> move, then it reached my city early this morning, but since I didn't pay
> extra for timed delivery (and the shipper doesn't have special
> arrangements), it didn't go on a truck today. I should get it tomorrow.
>
> I could have paid more to get it faster, and some large-scale shippers
> have special arrangements that seem to get their packages priority. How
> is this different from Internet traffic?
>
> --
> Chris Adams <cma@cmadams.net>
--
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
