Mobile/PDA About Us Advertise here


		User name	Password

		Not registered yet? Register here. Lost your password? Click here.

Browse by topic

News

Verizon's Lynch says operator should be able to manage data by priority

23 August 2008 22:12 by James "Dela" Delahunty | 7 comments

Verizon CTO Richard Lynch spoke about prioritizing Internet data packets at the Progress & Freedom Foundation's annual Aspen conference on tech policy. He was making his points public on behalf of the company following the FCC's recent order made to Comcast to turn over details on its "unreasonable network management practices" within 30 days.

Lynch said that Verizon's view is that network management is, and has always been, a requirement, even in the analog age. He explained that he believes time-sensitive packets should be prioritized over less-sensitive packets. For his example, he said VoIP data packets should be prioritized over P2P data packets.

Either way, he said that Verizon is always committed to delivering any data requested by customers. The question comes down to what packets would need to be delayed, but Lynch argues the 22ms delay would not be noticeable to most customers anyway. For Verizon, due to its fiber-to-the-home commitment, it doesn't suffer as much from congestion issues that badly affect other cable operators.

Lynch does not agree that all cable operators should have to guarantee delivering all packets without delay, and rejects the proposal that the companies should just keep investing money. He noted that Verizon invests $17 billion annually in its network infrastructure already, and aiming to develop a network that can deliver all data packets without delay at peak times is implausible considering traffic rises by 50% each year.

He continued that customers would be much more upset by the charges Verizon would have to impose on the end-user to keep developing that network. Lynch argued that the best way to avoid customer suspicion is transparency: full disclosure of network management practices.

Permalink to this article

We will raise bandwidth caps if necessary, says Comcast (24 September 2008)

Comcast submits final details on broadband management (22 September 2008)

P2P traffic drops while streaming grows exponentially (7 September 2008)

Comcast appeals FCC ruling on net neutrality (6 September 2008)

Comcast to start bandwidth caps (29 August 2008)

Verizon asks FCC for equal access to cable boxes (13 August 2008)

FiOS TV launches in New York City this week (28 July 2008)

Cablevision adding more free HD channels (2 July 2008)

Is Verizon too cheap or is fiber too expensive? (18 June 2008)

Verizon shuts down access to Usenet (15 June 2008)

« Previous news article
Louisiana man sentenced to one year for piracy

Next news article »
DTV penetration in U.S. and Western Europe to surge

Post your comment

Discuss this article!
susieqbbb (Member) 24 August 2008 1:40
i am sorry to say you delay a network any and users will notice. [ + quote]
engage16 (Member) 24 August 2008 2:09
It wasn't that they were 'delaying the packets' it was the fact that they were inserting fake 'stop' packets into the stream and ending the downloads... [ + quote]
jutsu (Junior Member) 24 August 2008 8:24
Delaying packets is no problem for me. My 1mbps adsl delay is about 500ms to international server. Download is 40-50KB.s Delay about 70ms to local server, download also 40-50KB.s. Delaying data wont affect torrent or download performance. As long as gaming, voip, chat, all the time sensitive data is not delayed. Everyone should feel no differents. Atleast i feel no different in download speed :D But yes, if the delay is extreme. Browsing speed will get affected too. But downloads will still run as fast as it always been. [ + quote]
ALIS123 (Junior Member) 24 August 2008 9:56
So basically he's saying that ISP's should have control over everything that moves on the internet. If they want to "manage" the traffic they need to know everything thats moving from the internet to computers. Fuck that. If you sell someone an internet connection you have no right to control where he/she uses the bandwith. [ + quote]
atomicxl (Newbie) 24 August 2008 21:42
*Originally posted by Article:* He noted that Verizon invests $17 billion annually in its network infrastructure already, and aiming to develop a network that can deliver all data packets without delay at peak times is implausible considering traffic rises by 50% each year. *Originally posted by ALIS123:* So basically he's saying that ISP's should have control over everything that moves on the internet. If they want to "manage" the traffic they need to know everything thats moving from the internet to computers. Fuck that. If you sell someone an internet connection you have no right to control where he/she uses the bandwith. You want them to conjure this magic network from thin air? Even if they could, are you ready for you monthly bill to skyrocket at gas like percentages... compared to 1996? [ + quote]
DRokKer (Newbie) 25 August 2008 18:54
crap! the main reason i pay extra for my connection is to play SimRacing games with my friend from all over the world ( simjunkies.org ) when they start slowing the packets from my games the whole thing gets messed up. how do they know what packet if from what? are they god!? [ + quote]
Hardwyre (Newbie) 26 August 2008 13:09
This is just another example of how we need to implement a plan to collectively ramp-up the internet infrastructure of the U.S.A. to 1Gbps. Then there won't be any more (or at least less) whining about how to allocate the bandwidth. and for that matter, we need to all convert to IPv6 already. [ + quote]