This is an incredibly disingenuous article.
Quality of Service (QoS), using Differentiated Services (DSCP) or Class of Service (CoS), is a basic network gear feature which these manufacturers support in one way or another on most of their products: it is a necessary feature for Local, Metropolitan or Wide Area Networks (LAN, MAN, WAN), which these products often support. ISPs, remember, don’t just offer Internet access to consumers, but they also offer private networks, either MANs or WANs, often using technologies like MPLS and often offering QoS for services like VoIP or Video.
To say that these vendors sell tools used against Net Neutrality is like complaining about the hardware store selling hammers, because they can be used to kill people. The fact is that QoS and DSCP are Internet standards defined in RFC 2474 and are essential to most private networks.
Sandvine, from what I’ve heard, is not exactly your run-of-the-mill networking company, and the accusation on them may stand. But to put IBM, Cisco and Intel in the same basket just because they sell equipment that supports QoS is ridiculous. The author mentions DSCP in a rather dismissive yet doesn’t follow the point from there, he just drops it.
The fact is, ANY modern network equipment of the grade used by ISPs or large networks will support QoS in some way. it is a standard feature. This cannot be used as an argument to say these companies are “against net neutrality”. Not unless you also argue that hardware stores are “against human life”.
The “demand” for ever-increasing profit has become an ethical and moral problem that needs to be dealt with if capitalism is to survive.
Look at the sheer density of mud slinging in this short post. Just look at it.
Cory, I’m disappointed that you forgot the words “enslave,” “Nazi,” and “baby killer.”
OK, but as they say …
“The Administration must act to protect against calls for utility-like common carrier regulation
Would that?
“Never let facts get in the way of a manufactured outrage” - Me.
Have you ever been to B&Q? (or Home Depot, I imagine is similar for Yanks).
It’s almost as though the complaints about Cory’s submissions are motivated by an attitude toward Cory himself rather than problems with the actual articles.
Okay, if they don’t intend for their products to be used to stomp on net neutrality, why did they take the trouble to sign this letter? (Can’t talk too much, since I work for one of the companies on that list, but still, that’s pretty fucked.)
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
