*** Postdoc position available ***

Our focus in this work is on net neutrality, the most contentious communications policy issue considered by Congress during 2005-2006. The work is based on the experience of serving as an IEEE/AAAS Congressional Fellow during 2006, and working on this issue in the United States Senate.

Net neutrality represents the idea that Internet users are entitled to service that does not discriminate on the basis of source, destination, or ownership of Internet traffic. The United States Congress is considering legislation on net neutrality, and debate over the issue has generated intense lobbying. Congressional action will substantially affect the evolution of the Internet and of future Internet research.

We argue that neither the pro nor anti net neutrality positions are consistent with the philosophy of Internet architecture. Our view is that the net neutrality issue is the result of a fragmented communications policy unable to deal with technology convergence. We develop a net neutrality policy based on the layered structure of the Internet that gracefully accommodates convergence. Our framework distinguishes between discrimination in high barrier-to-entry network infrastructure and in low barrier-to-entry applications. The policy prohibits use of Internet infrastructure to produce an uneven playing field in Internet applications. In this manner, the policy restricts an Internet service provider's ability to discriminate in a manner that extracts oligopoly rents, while simultaneously ensuring that ISPs can use desirable forms of network management. We illustrate how this net neutrality policy can draw upon current communications law through draft statute language. We believe this approach is well grounded in both technology and policy, and that it illustrates a middle ground that may even be somewhat agreeable to the opposing forces on this issue.

The first paper is intended for people with a background in communications policy:

A Layered Network Approach to Net Neutrality, International Journal of Communication, Special Section on Net Neutrality, vol. 1, 2007.

The second paper is intended for people with a technical background in networking:

Implications of Internet Architecture upon Net Neutrality, ACM Transactions on Internet Technology, vol. 9 no. 2, May 2009, pp. 5:1-5:28.

As part of the wider debate over net neutrality, traffic management practices of Internet Service Providers have become an issue of public concern. The Federal Communications Commission has asked for public input on whether deep packet inspection and other traffic management practices are reasonable forms of network management. Little attention has been paid to this issue within the academic networking community, and most Internet policy researchers have recommended a case-by-case analysis.

In contrast, in these papers we propose a framework for the classification of traffic management practices as reasonable or unreasonable. To build the framework, we focus both on the technical aspects of traffic management techniques and on the goals and practices of an ISP that uses these techniques. The framework classifies traffic management practices as reasonable or unreasonable on the basis of the technique used and on the basis of how and when the techniques are applied. We suggest that whether a traffic management practice is reasonable largely rests on the answers to four questions regarding the techniques and practices used. We consider examples of how these techniques are used by ISPs, and how the answers to these four questions collectively affeect the degree to which a traffic management practice is reasonable. Based on these questions, we propose a framework that classifies techniques as unreasonable if they are unreasonably anti-competitive, cause undue harm to consumers, or unreasonably impair free speech.

The first two papers are intended for people with a technical background in networking:

Four Questions that Determine Whether Traffic Management is Reasonable, IFIP/IEEE International Symposium on Integrated Network Management (IM), New York, NY, June 2009, pp. 137-140.

Some Traffic Management Practices are Unreasonable, IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications and Networks (ICCCN), San Francisco, CA, August 2009, pp. 137-140.

The third paper is intended for people with a background in communications policy:

How to Determine Whether a Traffic Management Practice is Reasonable (with A. Ghosh), Research Conference on Communication, Information and Internet Policy (TPRC), Arlington, Virginia, September 2009.

 

Portions of this work were supported by NSF. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation, Sen. Ben Nelson, or IEEE. This material is presented to ensure timely dissemination of scholarly and technical work. Copyright and all rights therein are retained by authors or by other copyright holders. All persons copying this information are expected to adhere to the terms and constraints invoked by each author's copyright. One print or electronic copy may be made for personal use only. Permission must be obtained from the copyright holder for systematic or multiple reproduction, distribution to multiple locations via electronic or other means, duplication of any material in these papers for a fee or for commercial purposes, modification of the content of these papers, reprinting or republishing of this material for advertising or promotional purposes or for creating new collective works for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, and to reuse any copyrighted component of this work in other works.