Net Neutrality Legislative Proposal
Seth Johnson
seth.johnson at RealMeasures.dyndns.org
Mon Jul 10 19:25:55 UTC 2006
Hello folks, please consider endorsing this legislative proposal
on net neutrality. It's a bit different from the others you may
have heard of . . .
> http://www.dpsproject.com
This bill focuses on net neutrality in terms of the IP protocol,
rather than the "equal treatment" and "nondiscrimination"
application-layer policy approaches you usually hear about.
One of the Intro pages from the site above, and the legislative
Language, are pasted below.
Coverage on Infoworld:
> http://www.infoworld.com/article/06/06/20/79453_HNnetneutrality_1.html
David Weinberger on Stevens and a Commentary by David Reed:
> http://www.hyperorg.com/blogger/mtarchive/sen_stevens_and_david_reed_on.html
Here's a link to a research paper by Dave Clark, et al. that
identifies the IP protocol as the "spanning layer" that assures
innovation across hardware and protocols:
> http://www.isi.edu/newarch/iDOCS/final.finalreport.pdf
Seth Johnson
---
> http://www.dpsproject.com/twotypes.html
Two Types of Neutrality
So far, much of the argument over "net neutrality" has been over
whether service providers should be allowed to favor one
application, destination or Internet service over another. This
is Net neutrality at the application layer. But the real issue is
the neutrality of the IP layer where routers treat alike bits
from every type of application. This neutrality is what makes the
Internet flexible -- while it also assures uniform treatment of
information flow. If this neutrality is not maintained, the
Internet will be changed fundamentally. It will no longer be the
flexible, open platform that allows anyone with a good idea to
compete on a level ground.
IP-layer neutrality is not a property of the Internet. It is the
Internet. The Internet is a set of agreements (protocols) that
enable networks to work together. The heart of the Internet
protocol is the agreement that all data packets will be passed
through without regard to which application created them or
what's inside of them. This reliable, uniform treatment of
packets is precisely what has made the Internet a marketplace of
innovation so critical to our economy.
Providers certainly should be allowed to develop services within
their own networks, treating data any way they want. But that's
not the Internet. If they want to participate in the Internet,
they need to follow the protocols that have been developed over
the course of more than thirty years through consensus standards
processes. Nor should they be permitted to single-handedly
subvert the authority of the processes that have developed and
maintained the Internet.
We call on Congress to end the confusion and protect not only the
Internet but the tens of millions of American citizens who need
to know that when they buy Internet access, they're getting
access to the real Internet. Network providers who offer services
that depend on violating IP-layer neutrality should be prohibited
from labeling those services as "Internet," as their doing so
will only undermine the weight of consensus authority presently
accorded to the existing standards. The term "Internet"
represents specific standards that provide IP-layer neutral
connectivity that supports the openness of access and innovation
that have been the defining characteristics of the Internet since
its origins.
To that end, we present the attached draft legislative language
and call for concerned citizens and members of Congress to offer
their support for passing it into law.
---
> http://www.dpsproject.com/legislation.html
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the "Internet Platform for
Innovation Act of 2006".
SEC. 2. FINDINGS. The Congress finds the following:
(1) The Internet is the most successful means of
communication ever developed, connecting people of all
walks of life across the globe and enabling
unprecedented flexibility in applications and
unfettered exchange of information and ideas.
(2) The success of the Internet is built on the
establishment of certain commonly observed principles
of practice, expressed in Internet protocols,
governing the manner in which transmissions are
exchanged. Interoperation among competing Internet
providers on the basis of these principles assures that
the Internet remains a generic, flexible platform that
supports innovation and free expression.
(3) This flexible platform, commonly referred to as the IP
layer of the Internet, enables users to independently
develop innovative applications by devising rules and
conventions describing how information transmitted
between connected users will be interpreted in order to
serve diverse purposes. The vast collection of
applications that have been freely created in this
manner is commonly referred to as the application
layer of the Internet.
(4) The Internet protocols that created this architecture
have been developed and maintained by globally
recognized standards bodies through participatory
processes that work to develop optimal engineering
designs and establish the consensus necessary for
interoperability.
(5) Among the commonly-observed principles of practice that
govern Internet transmissions are the following:
a) Transmissions are broken down into small pieces
referred to as "packets," comprised of small
portions of the overall information useful to the
users at each transmission's endpoints. A small set
of data is prefixed to these packets, describing the
source and destination of each packet and how it is
to be treated.
b) Internet routers transmit these packets to various
other routers, changing routers freely as a means of
managing network flow.
c) Internet routers transmit packets independently of
each other and independently of the applications
that the packets are supporting.
(6) These principles governing the IP layer establish a
technical behavior that not only assures the platform's
flexibility, but also assures its reliability,
availability, universal accessibility, and uniform
treatment of information flow. The IP layer assures
that all applications may compete on a level basis of
connectivity, be they commercially developed by a major
corporation and made available to millions, or non-
commercial applications developed by individuals and
offered at no charge.
(7) These principles of practice are commonly understood
and recognized as features of existing, commonly-
observed communications standards defining the behavior
of the Internet transport.
(8) This settled understanding of the Internet, based on
an architecture created by well-recognized standards
bodies, leading to user expectations about the
accessibility and behavior of the Internet, is what
"the Internet" has come to mean to users in the United
States and around the world.
(9) Network providers who analyze and interpret the types
of applications being conveyed within packets at the IP
layer in order to offer special service features
(including but not limited to prioritized delivery)
intrinsically favor particular application designs that
they recognize over competing ones. This practice
therefore works at odds with the flexibility and other
desirable features of the IP layer brought about by the
above-described principles of practice. They depend,
for their success, on the neutral platform afforded at
the IP layer, even as they upset the neutrality of the
IP layer to benefit services best offered at the
application layer.
(10) Network providers who offer special treatment for
specific types of applications by identifying the
applications being conveyed by packets, presently face
competition from providers who provide neutral networks
by means of the above principles, as well as from the
diversity of applications, flexibility, uniform
treatment of information flow, availability and access
made possible by these networks.
(11) If network providers in the United States were given
support in legislation for presenting as "Internet"
services that diverge from the above global principles
of practice, as they offer special treatment of packet
transmissions on the basis of identifying particular
types of applications, the result would be to:
a) supplant and undermine the consensus authority
currently accorded to existing international
protocols and standards-making processes;
b) impair innovation and competition by undermining the
flexibility and other desirable features afforded by
the technical behavior of the Internet transport as
described above;
c) deny consumers the expectation of quality and
breadth of service globally associated with the
Internet; and
d) suppress freedom of speech within the United States,
while the people of other nations continue to enjoy
unabridged Internet communications;
(12) It is in the national interest to
a) support the international consensus authority that
gave rise to the current IP layer and associated
protocols;
b) encourage innovation in the applications layer of
the Internet through the flexibility, reliability,
availability, and accessibility afforded by the
commonly established principles of practice
expressed in existing consensus standards for the IP
layer; and
c) assure consumers in the United States that the
globally accessible and open architecture of the
Internet will be preserved even as some Internet
access providers may choose to compete in offering
additional features to their customers.
SEC. 3. DECEPTIVE PRACTICES IN PROVIDING INTERNET ACCESS.
(1) Definitions. As used in this Section:
(A) Internet. The term Internet means the worldwide,
publicly accessible system of interconnected
computer networks that transmit data by packet
switching using the standard Internet Protocol (IP),
some characteristics of which include:
i) Transmissions between users who hold globally
reachable addresses, and which transmissions are
broken down into smaller segments referred to as
"packets" comprised of a small portion of
information useful to the users at each
transmission's endpoints, and a small set of
prefixed data describing the source and
destination of each transmission and how the
packet is to be treated;
ii) routers that transmit these packets to various
other routers on a best efforts basis, changing
routers freely as a means of managing network
flow; and
iii) said routers transmit packets independently of
each other and independently of the particular
application in use, in accordance with globally
defined protocol requirements and
recommendations.
(B) Internet access. The term Internet access means
a service that enables users to transmit and receive
transmissions of data using the Internet Protocol in
a manner that is agnostic to the nature, source or
destination of the transmission of any packet. Such
IP transmissions may include information, text,
sounds, images and other content such as messaging
and electronic mail.
(2) Any person engaged in interstate commerce that charges
a fee for the provision of Internet access must in fact
provide access to the Internet in accord with the above
definition, regardless whether additional proprietary
content, information or other services are also
provided as part of a package of services offered to
consumers.
(3) Network providers that offer special features based on
analyzing and identifying particular applications being
conveyed by packet transmissions must not describe
these services as "Internet" services. Any
representation as to the speed or bandwidth of the
Internet access shall be limited to the speed or
bandwidth allocated to Internet access.
(4) Unfair or Deceptive Act or Practice- A violation of
paragraphs 2 or 3 shall be treated as a violation of a
rule defining an unfair or deceptive act or practice
prescribed under section 18(a)(1)(B) of the Federal
Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 57a(a)(1)(B)). The
Federal Trade Commission shall enforce this Act in the
same manner, by the same means, and with the same
jurisdiction as though all applicable terms and
provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act were
incorporated into and made a part of this Act.
More information about the NANOG
mailing list