Question from a provider: VoIP traffic prioritization from essentially our own service?
Moderator: One thing that won’t be allowed is prioritizing your own service over someone else’s similar service; that’s almost the whole point. FCC person: This is contemplated in the document. Existing services wouldn’t have to be reworked rapidly. Seeking input. Reasons to be concerned. Monopoly over last mile has a position to differentially treat such a service. This is one of the core concerns.
Q: Giving the same priority to somebody else’s similar VoIP service is essentially creating a trust relationship; how much traffic will the other service provider send?
FCC person: We get the point.
Q: Premium services to DHS or anyone else.
Q: Why won’t traffic move offshore?
A: How would that work?
Q: Example, VoIP service marks packets, rate limits. Regulation says you have to offer same QoS to all competitors. Provider moves service into LINX in London.
A: Nothing we’ve put forward here would require a VoIP provider acting as an application provider to make capacity available for other companies (as proposed).
A: This applies to broadband Internet providers with copper, glass, or something to the end user. That would be hard to do from London.
Moderator: International company, move service offshore, so as to have nonregulated piece to get around the rules.
FCC person: Rules would apply to broadband Internet access service. If you were providing VoIP in addition to BIas, these principles wouldn’t apply as currently proposed, to your VoIP service.
Moderator: But if he’s prepping up his VoIP service to get to his end users. But even if it moves offshore, you still have to treat the bits the same.
Panelist: If somebody calls you from London to Austin, the source in London doesn’t determine U.S. regulations.
Q from GS person: Enterprise applicability and enterprise QoS.
FCC person: wouldn’t be marketed at general purpose Internet access.
Q: If the optical infrastructure is the same, where does it stop?
Moderator: different products may be provisioned on same infrastructure. Moderator: different products may be provisioned on same infrastructure.
FCC Person: Proposed rules state that you can offer different levels of service to different users and that’s different from the network deciding on its own. The user, whether residential or business is allowed to subscribe to different levels of service.
Q: Does that mean the NPRM will specify packet delivery percentages?
Moderator: If I am an enterprise and I desire that I get different QoS, is that OK?
FCC Person: The NPRM again starts with consumer control as the touchstone. Can’t say about specific practices, before technological input.
Moderator: Enterprise wide area networking services, which are increasingly provided over the public Internet, could if you’re not careful, fall under this regulation. Need to carve that out.
Panelist: Is pay peering illegal? Can I no longer connect my network to another for an undisclosed sum of money?
FCC person: Nothing in the proposed rulemaking would do that.
See also diagram on page 42 for what’s in scope or not.
Moderator: And remember for the FCC, spirit matters more than letter.
Panelists and FCC solicit further input.