http://www.digitalsociety.org/2010/03/guest-post-net-neutrality-practical-or-political/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=guest-post-net-neutrality-practical-or-political Pro-Culture, Pro-Commerce Thu, 08 Dec 2011 00:48:15 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.3 http://www.digitalsociety.org/2010/03/guest-post-net-neutrality-practical-or-political/comment-page-1/#comment-3942 Brett Glass Thu, 11 Mar 2010 00:31:46 +0000 http://www.digitalsociety.org/?p=2777#comment-3942 The FCC rules say nothing about a "demarc" (point of demarcation). Remember, they're written with cell phones in mind and ignore the existence of fixed wireless providers like mine. A good example of a way in which the rules would hinder innovation and ossify business models and technology. The FCC rules say nothing about a “demarc” (point of demarcation). Remember, they’re written with cell phones in mind and ignore the existence of fixed wireless providers like mine. A good example of a way in which the rules would hinder innovation and ossify business models and technology.

]]> http://www.digitalsociety.org/2010/03/guest-post-net-neutrality-practical-or-political/comment-page-1/#comment-3822 Wes Felter Thu, 04 Mar 2010 20:43:31 +0000 http://www.digitalsociety.org/?p=2777#comment-3822 Brett, can you fix that problem by putting the demarc on the Ethernet side of the CPE rather than the RF side? In other words, the customer can attach any device they want... as long as it's Ethernet. This is how many cable networks work AFAIK, where the cableco owns and controls the modem but the customer owns the router. Brett, can you fix that problem by putting the demarc on the Ethernet side of the CPE rather than the RF side? In other words, the customer can attach any device they want… as long as it’s Ethernet. This is how many cable networks work AFAIK, where the cableco owns and controls the modem but the customer owns the router.

]]> http://www.digitalsociety.org/2010/03/guest-post-net-neutrality-practical-or-political/comment-page-1/#comment-3810 Brett Glass Thu, 04 Mar 2010 01:32:19 +0000 http://www.digitalsociety.org/?p=2777#comment-3810 The above article is an earnest attempt at an analysis, but is mistaken on some key points. For example, it characterizes a requirement to be able to use "any device on any network" as a "moderate" requirement, when in fact it is a crippling and onerous one for fixed wireless broadband providers (WISPs) like myself. See my comments to the FCC at http://www.brettglass.com/nprmcomment.pdf to understand why. The above article is an earnest attempt at an analysis, but is mistaken on some key points. For example, it characterizes a requirement to be able to use “any device on any network” as a “moderate” requirement, when in fact it is a crippling and onerous one for fixed wireless broadband providers (WISPs) like myself. See my comments to the FCC at http://www.brettglass.com/nprmcomment.pdf to understand why.

]]>