Here's The Proposal The FCC Says Doesn't Exist To Move Network Diagnostics To Proprietary Servers
from the oh-look-at-that dept
We recently wrote about some concerns by Vint Cerf and others that the FCC was considering a proposal to move some of their network diagnostics efforts — which are a really good thing — from the open M-Labs solution to proprietary servers run by the telcos. As we noted, the telcos denied that this was happening — and Henning Schulzrinne, the CTO of the FCC, showed up in our comments to strongly deny that such a proposal existed.
Yesterday, Vint Cerf distributed an open letter regarding concerns about the Measuring Broadband America measurement infrastructure. We share the objectives of the letter writers that “Open data and an independent, transparent measurement framework must be the cornerstones of any scientifically credible broadband Internet access measurement program.” Unfortunately, the letter claims: “Specifically, that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is considering a proposal to replace the Measurement Lab server infrastructure with closed infrastructure, run by the participating Internet service providers (ISPs) whose own speeds are being measured.” This is false.
The FCC is not considering replacing the Measurement Labs infrastructure. As part of a consensus-based discussion in the Measurement Collaborative, a group of public interest, research and ISP representatives, we have discussed how to enhance the existing measurement infrastructure to ensure the validity of the measurement data. Any such enhancements would be implemented solely to provide additional resiliency for the measurement infrastructure, not to replace existing infrastructure. Any data gathered would be subject to the same standards of data access and openness.
It turns out his claim that “this is false” is… well… false. Attached below, we have the proposal that supposedly doesn’t exist.
Filed Under: broadband, fcc, open, proposal
Companies: m-labs
Comments on “Here's The Proposal The FCC Says Doesn't Exist To Move Network Diagnostics To Proprietary Servers”
Lets see if we get another visit to the comments section from yesterdays contributor…
Re: Re:
Queue the crickets.
3…2…1…
Interesting...
One thing that’s notably missing from this article is a source. Where did you get this proposal from?
Re: Interesting...
apt-get shitty-proposal-src
Re: Re: Interesting...
apt-get source shitty-proposal
Paradox
THIS. SENTENCE. IS. FALSE.
don’tthinkaboutitdon’tthinkaboutitdon’tthinkaboutit.
Re: Paradox
I just go with it can’t be true or false because the sentence is nonsense.
Re: True
Uh…”TRUE”. I’ll go “true”. Huh, that was easy. I’ll be honest, I might have heard that one before, though; sort of cheating.
Re: Re: True
It’s a paradox! There is no answer! Look! This place is going to blow up if I don’t get back in my body!
Re: Re: Re: True
I was having so much naughty fun with your body, gonna be awkward when you get back.
Re: Re: Re: False
Ah…”FALSE”. I’ll go “false”.
my point still obtains...
…*whatever* laws, rules, regs, guidelines, etc there are, without the oversight, without the authority, without the the resources, and without the will to enforce said laws, the ‘law’ becomes worse than meaningless: an appearance of lawfulness where there is none…
when ‘laws’ are enforced with extreme prejudice against the 99%, and all but unenforced against the 1%, that is called injustice and oppression…
power does not devolve voluntarily, kampers…
art guerrilla
aka ann archy
eof
Re: my point still obtains...
Oh your one of those smelly OWS hippies.
GO TAKE A BATH STINKBOMB
Stolen Authority
The FCC?s authority over the Internet is made up (by them) and should not be allowed to endure. The FCC appointed pinheads are accountable to no group of voters and should be forced to follow the previous federal court?s decision calling into question the FCC’s authority for any regulation of the Internet.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-30686_3-20004313-266.html
Congress, our elected officials who are ?accountable? 😉 to the voters (see SOPA), are the de facto trustees of the Internet since it is WE THE PEOPLE?s Internet. I want to be able to call my Congressional offices and hold THEM accountable, I can?t do that with the FCC.
Open M-labs is proprietary !!!!.. as usual Masnick, your a fuckup.. LOL
Re: Not
Proprietary ? branded, trademarked, registered
MLabs
Proprietary ? privately-owned, privately-operated
Not MLabs
http://www.measurementlab.net/fr/news/2012/mar/28/m-lab-google-summer-code-2012-mentoring-organization
Vint made a relatively absolute claim that I’m not sure is so absolute in the proposal. You’re right that the proposal does seem to be designed to allow for the later back-door removal of M-Lab from the scheme (subject to replacement by another “research platform,” which is not defined in the document but does seem to be inherently opposed to ISP ownership), but it doesn’t require that. It does say that “The above approach will allow us to use ‘on-net’ results in the future as our primary data source for reports”; however, it also states fairly clearly that the off-net data (including research platforms) must keep being used in case the ISP’s internal numbers are off, in which case the ISP’s internal numbers can be discarded. I’m afraid that I have to side with Henning Schulzrinne in rejecting any reading of the proposal as absolutely replacing M-Lab.
Oh, and SamKnows wants sudo rights on every ISP-owned test server so they can check why the ISP’s suddenly giving them bad data. I like that idea.
Where can i get the source of this information, very interested