[seedig] Fwd: [Internet Policy] ISOC Community Forum: Education TOMORROW 1300-1430 UTC

Michael J. Oghia mike.oghia at gmail.com
Tue Dec 5 14:42:51 CET 2017


FYI, this is tomorrow (Dec. 6).

One of the speakers is from Slovenia as well.


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Jane Coffin <coffin at isoc.org>
Date: Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 2:30 PM
Subject: [Internet Policy] ISOC Community Forum: Education TOMORROW
1300-1430 UTC
To: ISOC Internet Policy <internetpolicy at elists.isoc.org>


Hi All –



Apologies for some clear marketing – but for a festive reason – Community
Forum Internet & Education:

https://www.internetsociety.org/events/community-forums/2017/q4/



More below:



Can the Internet in education close the digital divide?



There likely isn’t a simple “yes” or “no” answer to such a question, but it
sparks an interesting thought at a time when universal access to
information and quality lifelong learning (UN Sustainable Development Goal
4) has never been more of a priority.



Join us on December 6 to hear from a panel of experts and work with us to
determine what actions we must take together to underscore Internet in
Education so that no one is left behind.



The Community Forum will consider some of the most challenging questions
relating to the impact of the Internet on education, including:



    How can a national ICT in Education program help connect the
unconnected?

    How do we better equip our children with digital skills for the future?

    How can the Internet in Education bolster the knowledge economy?



This will be a 90-minute session moderated by Ben Petrazzini, IDRC
(International Development Research Centre) and will be broken into a panel
discussion and a community Q+A segment. The conversation will feature
several guest speakers, including:



    Tomi Dolenc, Academic and Research Network (ARNES), Slovenia

    Miguel Brechner, Ceibal Plan, Uruguay

    Dirk Hastedt, IEA, Netherlands & Germany

    Shireen Yacoub, Edraak.org, Jordan

    Patrick Muinda, Ministry of Education and Sports, Uganda



We also invite you to discover our new policy paper on Internet access and
education ahead of our discussion, to explore the ways in which
policymakers can unlock the potential of the Internet in support of
education. You can read the policy paper on our website.



Register here:  https://www.internetsociety.org/events/community-forums/
2017/q4/registration/





Internet Society | www.internetsociety.org

Skype:  janercoffin

Mobile/WhatsApp:  +1.202.247.8429 <+1%20202-247-8429>



*From: *InternetPolicy <internetpolicy-bounces at elists.isoc.org> on behalf
of Richard Bennett <richard at bennett.com>
*Date: *Wednesday, November 29, 2017 at 2:39 PM
*To: *"cdel at firsthand.net" <cdel at firsthand.net>
*Cc: *"internetpolicy at elists.isoc.org" <internetpolicy at elists.isoc.org>
*Subject: *Re: [Internet Policy] FYI - a message about the FCC statement on
Net Neutrality



There’s a lot of misunderstanding of the power ISPs have to control web
page load time. The quoted message assumes that web speed is controlled by
ISPs speeding up or slowing down traffic, hence it expresses worry that
ever higher speed can be had for a fee. That would be bad for little guys,
of course.



But the reality is web users don’t see web pages nearly as fast as the
network can deliver them. The FCC and others measure web page load times
and find that increasing broadband speed (AKA “bandwidth”) produces
benefits when the baseline speed is less than 12 Mbps. Moving from a 12-15
Mbps broadband connection to 25, 50, or 100 does’t produce any discernible
improvement in page load time.  As the average broadband speed in the US is
more than 70 Mbps now, web page load time is not controlled by ISPs.



The limiting factors are web server capacity, page design, and the nature,
number, and density of ads. So the attempt to level the playing field for
large and small websites has nothing to do with net neutrality or whipping
the ISPs.



See my TPRC paper for details: http://hightechforum.
org/get-measure-internet-performance-measurement-policy-tool/



RB



On Nov 29, 2017, at 10:28 AM, Christian de Larrinaga <cdel at firsthand.net>
wrote:



At what point is there a "public" as in "utility" service? Is the
Internet entirely a collection of private spaces subject to private
agreements between networks?

Clearly if Google blow and light their own fibre to my interconnect port
then people on my network are happy to expect to get optimum speed for
Google services. Provided I have other ports available to do similar
with other services and have strong Internet peering for people on my
network and have plenty of spare bandwidth throughout then all is good.

But if I favour Amazon traffic over Google and Amazon pay me to optimise
for them, should Google have a claim, or somebody on my network wanting
to use Google rather than Amazon? Or should I just tell Google to cough
up some more $$?

If I favour Facebook Messenger over Wire or Signal or Hangouts because
Facebook pay me more to optimise for them is that a problem? Would Wire,
Signal and their users on my network and other networks have a
legitimate complaint? (Bearing in mind that if I limit connectivity for
an application service on my network it will also impact users of those
apps on other networks and so lower the perceived quality of those apps
globally when attached to my users).

What are the comparative incentives for me to add capacity to my
"app-managed" network, to my unmanaged network? What if there are no
good alternative ways for users to make an informed alternative market
choice a realistic option should I decide to just milk my existing
infrastructure ?


C


vinton cerf wrote:

Fred, Scott and I agree, I think, that differentiation is OK under at
least one NN interpretation as long as each class is available to
everyone on the same terms and conditions. That does set up a
potential for richer companies to gain access to services that less
wealthy companies cannot afford but in some sense that is true for the
case that the metric is bandwidth. It seems entirely reasonable to me
that higher (peak?) bandwidth costs more than lower bandwidth. It also
seems reasonable, under this interpretation that someone paying more,
might get proportionally more capacity under congested conditions (ie.
a higher fraction of the then available capacity).

Others on the list may disagree with this version, of course. Fred and
Scott, have I misstated your positions?

vint


On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 1:03 AM, Fred Baker <fredbakersba at gmail.com
<mailto:fredbakersba at gmail.com <fredbakersba at gmail.com>>> wrote:




On Nov 28, 2017, at 3:38 PM, Scott Brim <scott.brim at gmail.com

   <mailto:scott.brim at gmail.com <scott.brim at gmail.com>>> wrote:


I believe you'll get pushback on declaring all data the same.

   That is, treatment should be allowed to differentiate between
   types of data as long as treatment is neutral within a type.

   Which, amazingly enough, has been my point on at least one variant
   of Net Neutrality. A network should be able to treat a class of
   traffic differently than others if it does so consistently and
   without bias. However, there is at least one variant of Net
   Neutrality that says that QoS treatment is out of bounds.


Scott

On Nov 28, 2017 14:44, "Fred Baker" <fredbakersba at gmail.com

   <mailto:fredbakersba at gmail.com <fredbakersba at gmail.com>>> wrote:




On Nov 28, 2017, at 3:11 AM, Martin J. Dürst

   <duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp <mailto:duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp
<duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp>>> wrote:


On 2017/11/28 17:09, Michael Kende wrote:

Thanks Jason. With regards to the second point below, my

   sense was that pre-2015, an ISP seeking payments from a backbone
   or CDN could have been viewed in two lights – first, as any other
   provider seeking compensation for accepting an incoming traffic
   imbalance (e.g. paid peering) or second as an ISP charging for
   content (e.g. a net neutrality issue),


I'm not an expert on net neutrality or network

   interconnection, but my guess would be that as long as all data
   (or as much as the interconnection allows) gets through,
   independent of the nature of the data or where it comes from (or
   goes to), then there's no issue of net neutrality, even if there's
   some payment.


Regards,   Martin.


That matches my perception. Net Neutrality (or the lack of it)

   is about traffic management policy, not payments. In short,
   traffic management policy for legal traffic is neutral with
   respect to the source or destination of a message, the application
   that it is part of, or the persons or businesses represented.
   There is an obvious exception for traffic deemed spam, malware, or
   attack traffic. I would expect that anywhere two parties
   (subscribers with their upstreams, or two organizations) exchange
   traffic, there are commercial matters to discuss, and the validity
   of those discussions are a different question.


_______________________________________________
To manage your ISOC subscriptions or unsubscribe,
please log into the ISOC Member Portal:
https://portal.isoc.org/
Then choose Interests & Subscriptions from the My Account menu.



   _______________________________________________
   To manage your ISOC subscriptions or unsubscribe,
   please log into the ISOC Member Portal:
   https://portal.isoc.org/
   Then choose Interests & Subscriptions from the My Account menu.


_______________________________________________
To manage your ISOC subscriptions or unsubscribe,
please log into the ISOC Member Portal:
https://portal.isoc.org/
Then choose Interests & Subscriptions from the My Account menu.


-- 
Christian de Larrinaga  FBCS, CITP,
-------------------------
@ FirstHand
-------------------------
+44 7989 386778 <+44%207989%20386778>
cdel at firsthand.net
-------------------------

_______________________________________________
To manage your ISOC subscriptions or unsubscribe,
please log into the ISOC Member Portal:
https://portal.isoc.org/
Then choose Interests & Subscriptions from the My Account menu.



—

Richard Bennett
High Tech Forum <http://hightechforum.org> Founder

Ethernet & Wi-Fi standards co-creator



Internet Policy Consultant



_______________________________________________
To manage your ISOC subscriptions or unsubscribe,
please log into the ISOC Member Portal:
https://portal.isoc.org/
Then choose Interests & Subscriptions from the My Account menu.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.rnids.rs/pipermail/seedig/attachments/20171205/9a5b48dd/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4497 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.rnids.rs/pipermail/seedig/attachments/20171205/9a5b48dd/attachment.bin>


More information about the seedig mailing list