This video gets to the bottom of the Comcast versus Level 3 Communications dispute by explaining how peering and Internet transit functions, and by examining the known facts surrounding this dispute.

It seems like every time there is a problem between business relationships in the telecom world these days, one side screams “Net Neutrality” and the blogosphere, twitterverse and news media go bananas. It’s like screaming fire in a movie theater, or yelling bomb in an airport, or even playing the race card in some hotly debated political issue.

Level 3 won its bid on Netflix content delivery because it intends to break its contractual obligations on peering with Comcast and essentially resell stolen bandwidth to Netflix. Now it makes perfect sense how Level 3 managed to outbid Akamai since no CDN provider operating legally could outbid hot goods.

In yet another case of a made up conspiracy, OpenDNS founder David Ulevitch is misleading the public about Verizon Wireless supposedly blocking OpenDNS servers. I personally tested this accusation and verified that the Verizon Wireless network does not block OpenDNS.

Today is the last day to respond to the Department of Commerce Notice of Inquiry on Copyright Policy, Creativity, and Innovation in the Internet Economy (Oct. 5, 2010), asking for comment on “the challenges of protecting copyrighted works online and the relationship between copyright law and innovation in the Internet economy,” as inputs to a [...]

Kim Hart reports that FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski is pushing ahead with his Net Neutrality plans next monthand might even cover wireless networks. This is despite a majority of congress objecting and a court with a long history of enforcing the “congressional tether” with an iron fist. This is despite a competitive wireless market with special requirements unique to wireless networks.

To clarify things, China Telecom did not hijack “15% of all web traffic” or “15% of all Internet traffic” but they did hijack 15% of all the IP routes. That means traffic hijacking could have easily occurred but we don’t know for certain. The real lesson here is that the potential exists for easy traffic hijacking and the Internet’s routing infrastructure is insecure.

Should the government ban the “free” shipping service offered through “Amazon Prime?” What about Wal-Mart’s announcement last week that they would provide free shipping through Christmas on thousands of different items in response to the success Amazon has had? A key proposal from “Net Neutrality” lobbyists is that the government should prohibit Internet content providers from offering free delivery.

Netflix will switch from Akamai to Level 3 Communications for its CDN service, and Level 3 will have to double its storage capacity and add 2.9 terabits per second (Tbps) of bandwidth to accommodate Netflix. There is no such thing as “server neutrality” or “storage neutrality”, “IT neutrality”, or “Net Neutrality”.

Microsoft technically “fixed” their sidejacking vulnerability by giving Hotmail users the option of manually enabling SSL. The problem is that most users won’t know to do this and even if they do, they’ll be forced to break Outlook Connector, Live Mail, and Windows Mobile Hotmail connectivity.