1. Net Neutrality
Web Science Discussion Group
4th May 2011

2. Overview
• What is Net Neutrality?
• Net Neutrality Issues
• The For Argument
• The Against Argument
• Summary
• Discussion
2

3. What is Net Neutrality (NN)?
• Network design principle
• All content, sites, platforms treated equally
– All information can be carried by Internet Service Providers (ISPs)
– All users are given the same rights/permissions/bandwidth
“A neutral network should be expected to deliver the most to a nation
and the world economically, by serving as an innovation platform, and
socially, by facilitating the widest variety of interactions between
people”
(Wu, T, 2007)
3

4. What NN is fighting Against
• Blocking of Content
– Unblocked by payment or fully blocked
• Termination Monopoly Pricing
– Charging those who wish to access ISP users
• Most Favored Network (MFN) Violations
– Preferential treatment to certain providers or applications
• Transparency Failures
– Metrics are hidden from the customer – i.e. bandwidth, latency
4

5. ISPs: New ‘stewards’ of media content?
5

6. What Does NN Affect?
• The Global Internet and Web
• Mobile Web
• Individuals and Organizations / Businesses (large and small)
– Especially content providers and heavy bandwidth users
• It primarily affects access and network service to those at the ends of
the connections.
• An enforced principle of net neutrality would affect ISPs by directly
limiting their ability to discriminate traffic in their network. In a NN
internet a „dumb‟ pipe or “common carrier” wouldn‟t discriminate
between packets.
6

7. NN: The For Argument
• Ensure equal access to the Internet for all, including small
companies, religious and non-profit agencies.
– Makes ISP‟s shakedowns for cash on producers impossible
• Multi-tiered networks could lead fragmentation of internet
services, such as the Web.
– At very least, a class system of content providers could emerge
• ISP‟s with extra services won‟t be allowed to treat
competitors unfairly
– ISPs often run telephone, or cable video services which compete
with other companies products such as VOIP
• Consumers run applications & use services of their choice 7

8. Quotes for the Pro NN Argument
• “The web has grown so fast precisely because we have
had two independent markets, one for connectivity, and the
other for content and applications."
(Tim Berners-Lee, 2011)
• “Network operators and ISPs could engage in anti-
competitive behaviour and suppress the quality of content
from provider services”
(Office of Communications (OFCOM)., 2010)
8

9. NN: The Against Argument
• By filtering bandwidth, speed of popular sites can be
increased
– i.e. YouTube can be given preference over TVCatchUp
• Limit bandwidth to different users
– i.e. A gamer is given less bandwidth than a doctor on emergency
call
• The cost of enforcing NN will be passed to customers.
– ISPs will levy this indirectly through higher subscriptions
• A deterrent for current unspoken rules and regulations
– There is already prioritisation of data (QoS), NN will just worsen
9
this

10. Quotes for the Against NN Argument
“If governance were to become the exclusive province of
nation states or captured by any other interests, we would
lose the foundation of the Internet's long-term potential and
transformative value.
“Decisions on its future should reflect the widest possible
range of views and the wisdom of the entire world
community – not just governmental organizations.”
Rod Beckstrom, ICANN CEO, Sept. 2010.
10

11. Why has NN come to prominence of late?
• The ISPs now have the technology to manage their
networks „intelligently‟.
– This includes packet inspection and traffic shaping
• Legal online streamed and hi-def video content is now
available and ISPs networks are struggling to cope
– Mechanisms such bandwidth throttling aren‟t suitable
• The ISPs do not want to act as „dumb pipes‟ and want
content providers to pay for network use and upgrades
– In return they will offer preferential access to their
subscribers, or else relegate services to a slow lane.
11

12. Why has NN come to prominence of late?
• Self-Regulation by ISPs and network providers isn‟t
working.
– Not transparent about traffic shaping policies
– Have in the past limited / cut off competitors products
such as VOIP.
• These issues have contributed to arriving at a decision
point: whether government regulation would promote
consumer rights, encourage innovation and competition
12

13. International Network Regulation
Broadband Connections by Type (2007) – Review of Network Economics
13
(Vol.8, Issue 1 – March 2009)

14. Paying the ISP / Network Charges
14

15. Current Research of NN issues
• Economists have been most active in NN research:
– Some simple economics models have suggested that 2
sided priced markets can lead to better social
outcomes, in certain conditions.
– Another model that demonstrated risk that network
neutrality rules that promote “commoditization” of
broadband Internet access services could deter entry
and result in an even more concentrated market
– Changing value propositions and consumer perceived
value of NN internet. A simple model that compares
cost and utility of „smart‟ network and „dumb‟ network, in
which consumer places some value in NN („dumb‟
network). 15

16. Unintended Consequences of Regulation
• The notion of “We are from the government, and we are
here to help you” may seem endearing, but it‟s a little naive.
• Even with best of intentions regulators often become
bedfellows of the companies being regulated, (e.g. The
Interstate Commerce Commission, created in 1887 to
regulate the railroads).
– Regulation was later used as a tool to stifle competition,
and raise prices, all in favour of incumbents.
– While it should protect consumers this gets twisted to
protect companies from competition
16

17. Summary
• A large part of the NN debate is all about money
– ISPs would like to get internet and web businesses to pay for
network use and upgrades, as well as subscribers. They want to
charge content providers for use of their network, and access to
their customers.
• The arguments for and against regulated NN are diverse, and arguably
strong, and both have the ideal of a competitive Open Internet / Web.
– More research is required on possible effects of „intelligent‟ vs
„dumb‟ networks, in order to add weight to arguments around NN.
• NN is a topical issue because ISPs are not transparent about how they
manage their network, and discriminating traffic can stifle competition.
• Unintended consequences of government regulation, such promoting of
incumbents‟ interests would be bad. 17

18. Discussion
1. ISPs are trying to manage and upgrade their networks to handle
current and future internet use. Should they start charging content
providers such as Internet and Web companies for use of their
network, or for preferential treatment?
2. What perceived value do you have for a dumb network (pro NN)
versus a smart (non NN) network? Are you prepared to pay £5, £10, or
more, or not, monthly for a dumb pipe ISP?
2. If self-regulation fails, should government regulate?
– UK Broadband companies are now drafting transparency
guidelines, but it is only first step though. (Attempt to stave off
government regulation)
3. Would a two tier (or multi-tier) internet work, or would it cause utilities
such as the Web to fragment?
18

19. References
• Net Neutrality FAQ, Tim Wu, http://timwu.org/network_neutrality.html
• A Rational debate on Net Neutrality: http://www.zdnet.com/blog/ou/a-rational-debate-on-
net-neutrality/512
• Father of Internet, Robert Kahn Warns Against Net Neutrality:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/01/18/kahn_net_neutrality_warning/
• ICANN CEO remarks on existing multi-stakeholder model, and against network regulation
http://www.icann.org/en/presentations/beckstrom-opening-igf-vilnius-14sep10-en.htm
• Ofcom‟s discussion document on Traffic Management and 'net neutrality‟, June 2010
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/consultations/net-neutrality/
• Rise of the Stupid Network, David Isenberg, http://www.hyperorg.com/misc/stupidnet.html
• Entangling the Web, Timothy B. Lee, 2006
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/03/opinion/03lee.html
19

20. References
• Net Neutrality FAQ, Tim Wu, http://timwu.org/network_neutrality.html
• A Rational debate on Net Neutrality: http://www.zdnet.com/blog/ou/a-rational-debate-on-
net-neutrality/512
• Father of Internet, Robert Kahn Warns Against Net Neutrality:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/01/18/kahn_net_neutrality_warning/
• ICANN CEO remarks on existing multi-stakeholder model, and against network regulation
http://www.icann.org/en/presentations/beckstrom-opening-igf-vilnius-14sep10-en.htm
• Ofcom‟s discussion document on Traffic Management and 'net neutrality‟, June 2010
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/consultations/net-neutrality/
• Rise of the Stupid Network, David Isenberg, http://www.hyperorg.com/misc/stupidnet.html
• Entangling the Web, Timothy B. Lee, 2006
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/03/opinion/03lee.html
20

21. Also available @
www.slideshare.net/
4th May 2011