Did you see this one coming? Yesterday, AT&T announced that their wireless subscribers with smartphones using peer-to-peer applications are subject to disconnection. While I haven't heard of the development of an iPhone P2P application, AT&T aims to head off the P2P issue at the pass - with a complete ban on P2P traffic on its wireless network.
What's AT&T's justification for the ban?
"AT&T's terms of service for mobile wireless broadband customers prohibit all uses that may cause extreme network capacity issues, and explicitly identify P2P file sharing applications as such a use," said Robert Quinn, AT&T's senior vice president of federal regulatory affairs.
"A small number of users of P2P file sharing applications served by a particular cell site could severely degrade the service quality enjoyed by all customers ... " Quinn said.
So, while the FCC contemplates bringing down the boom on Comcast for network management that didn't block anything, AT&T tells their customers if they use P2P, they'll need to find another wireless provider. It's remarkable that the rationale for Comcast's network management and AT&T's ban is nearly identical - the use of P2P by a small number of users degrades the Internet experience of all customers.
AT&T Bans Wireless P2P [Multichannel News]
AT&T Will Disconnect Wireless P2P Users [IP Democracy]
Yesterday's Washington Post featured a piece by FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell on the subject of the Comcast network management case and the broader issue of governmental regulation of the Internet. McDowell makes the case that the network engineers and scientists who have developed the Internet's numerous protocols and solved historical network congestion problems are smart enough to solve today's network congestion issues without the threat of additional government regulation.
The Internet has flourished because it has operated under the principle that engineers, not politicians or bureaucrats, should solve engineering problems.
Makes sense to me.
However, the net neutrality crowd is up in arms about McDowell's remarkably true statement. Over at Broadband Reports, Karl Bode says that McDowell is overstating the risk of the Internet grinding into gridlock in the absence of responsible network management. I disagree. Karl is still basing his argument on the discredited statements of Robb Topolski regarding TCP's inability to adequately serve as a network traffic cop when it comes to P2P.
Bravo to Commissioner McDowell for having the guts to stand up to the zealots. I have seen close-up the political pressure being placed on policymakers and it's pretty ugly. The P2P Defense League has successfully redefined this discussion to suit their goal without accountability to anyone.
Until they really get their way. That's when it all will hit the fan.
Looking to other news on this issue, Declan McCullagh at CNET News says that any sanction that the FCC imposes on Comcast in this case won't stick if Comcast appeals. And the independent cable operators association weighs in, cautioning against governmental regulation of network management, as reported by Multichannel News.
Who Should Solve This Internet Crisis? [Washington Post]
by FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell
Don’t regulate, collaborate [Broadband Politics]
Solving network challenges [CableTechTalk]
FCC's McDowell: The Internet Will Stop If You Regulate Comcast [Broadband Reports]
FCC probably can't police Comcast's BitTorrent throttling [CNET News]
Broadband Regulation Could Crimp Cablers, ACA Says [Multichannel News]
Comments