The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they could enshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post

Lee ler762 at
Sun Apr 27 13:47:29 UTC 2014

On 4/26/14, Larry Sheldon <LarrySheldon at> wrote:
> h/t Suresh Ramasubramanian
> FCC throws in the towel on net neutrality

Why isn't it as simple as I'm paying my ISP to deliver the bits to me
and Netflix is paying their [cdn?] provider to deliver the bits to me.
 Netflix is already paying their provider to deliver the bits to me,
so why do they have to also pay my ISP to deliver the bits to me?

It seems the FCC is on a roll - not only giving up on net neutrality
but building up the local monopoly:

  "The concept of targeting subsidies for broadband and voice service
to pockets of rural America where they are needed most is central to
the FCC's 2011 reforms. Later this year, "price cap" carriers will be
given the opportunity to accept Connect America Fund support in high
cost areas based on detailed local cost estimates, calculated by a
cost model. Incumbent carriers must choose to accept or decline the
offer of support for all entire high-cost locations they serve in a
given state; if they decline, the subsidies will be made available to
other providers, awarded through a Phase II competitive bidding

Why do the incumbent carriers get the right of first refusal for
subsidies?  They're the ones that haven't served their local
population so it seems like they should be the *last* to be offered


> Forward!  On to the next windmill, Sancho!
> --
> Requiescas in pace o email           Two identifying characteristics
>                                          of System Administrators:
> Ex turpi causa non oritur actio      Infallibility, and the ability to
>                                          learn from their mistakes.
>                                            (Adapted from Stephen Pinker)

More information about the NANOG mailing list