voip vs. your isp

[Mark J. Dulcey]

Matthew Gillen wrote:

> The article I mentioned wasn't even complaining about not giving VoIP high
> priority.  Apparently the mechanism Comshaft uses to implement their
> congestion-control unduly hurts VoIP, since it starts adding delays to packets
> from "heavy users" (ie makes them lower-priority than "normal" packets).
> 
> The problem is that /their/ voice service of course isn't subject this
> de-prioritorization.  So you're sort of railroaded into their service.

An additional problem is that they are trying to have it both ways -- 
giving themselves a specially privileged service WITHOUT the regulatory 
burden of offering a "telecommunications service" rather than an 
"information service". (The former would require higher payments to 
other telephone companies for interconnect to their networks.)

What I really want is a system where ISPs have no ties whatsoever to 
content companies of any kind. Among other things, that means that ISPs 
would not be able to offer television service. (Talk about specially 
privileged content!) But then I also want a system where cable companies 
have no ties to content companies -- so Time Warner would have to divest 
all its cable properties, all the cable companies would have to sell 
their stakes in Time Warner, Viacom, Fox, etc... Ain't gonna happen but 
it would be a fairer world.