Net Neutrality/Paid Prioritization Question

[drinkmorejava]

Given that paid prioritization will be illegal, what is one supposed to do about the following scenario:

Say I create a new cloud service that provides industrial automation and control services. This great product allows manufacturers to control and maintain entire environments remotely and with multiple redundant fail over at the fraction of the cost of on-site servers.

To work well I need to guarantee that the latency is always below 10ms between the cloud service and the customer's sites.

Will it now be illegal for an ISP to offer this service? It's almost guaranteed that all the traffic on their network can't have this latency, so they'll have to prioritize my service, which is something that both my customers and I are happy to pay for.

 

[Subyman]

You'd have to smartly locate your data centers and pay to build out hubs. Companies already do this. You can't bump another user off of the established infrastructure, that is the difference. It'd be like a trucking company paying a city to use the HOV lane.

 

[drinkmorejava]

You'd have to smartly locate your data centers and pay to build out hubs. Companies already do this. You can't bump another user off of the established infrastructure, that is the difference. It'd be like a trucking company paying a city to use the HOV lane.

That sounds like something that's much harder for a small company to do than pay for prioritization. Wasn't the whole point of banning prioritization to level the playing field with the big guys?

Many cities/states allow you to pay to use the HOV lane, but I don't know if commercial vehicles can use them... slightly tangential to your example, Fedex, UPS, etc often get reduced parking fines.

 

[piasabird]

Net neutrality is all about taxing the internet and controlling the little people so they can not compete. If a company cant deliver broadband then don't sell a product as broadband. Otherwise fine the hell out of them and put them out of business.

 

[piasabird]

I think if a company can not deliver broadband then the FCC should force the company to lower their rates until they can provide broadband. However, we all know what they will do is protect the mega corporations at expense of everyone else. I don't doubt there are lots of businesses running servers and only paying for commercial service or some fools that run game servers at home and they are eating up a lot of bandwidth. The poor fool sitting at home watching Netflix is the least of their worries. That does not take up any more bandwidth than cable TV.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Given that paid prioritization will be illegal, what is one supposed to do about the following scenario:

Say I create a new cloud service that provides industrial automation and control services. This great product allows manufacturers to control and maintain entire environments remotely and with multiple redundant fail over at the fraction of the cost of on-site servers.

To work well I need to guarantee that the latency is always below 10ms between the cloud service and the customer's sites.

Will it now be illegal for an ISP to offer this service? It's almost guaranteed that all the traffic on their network can't have this latency, so they'll have to prioritize my service, which is something that both my customers and I are happy to pay for.

IMO no Controls Engineer would allow this for actual run control. For data/historian items sure, maybe even runtime data to share between plants but actual control? Doubt it. Hell, Industrial is still 10-15 years behind technology wise even in the most progressive of Engineering departments due to hardware being behind.
BTW, you'd need multiple ISPs to rid yourself of single point failure

But the actual question is rather intriguing as to pay for priority.

 

[Subyman]

That sounds like something that's much harder for a small company to do than pay for prioritization. Wasn't the whole point of banning prioritization to level the playing field with the big guys?

Many cities/states allow you to pay to use the HOV lane, but I don't know if commercial vehicles can use them... slightly tangential to your example, Fedex, UPS, etc often get reduced parking fines.

Small companies need not build out their own infrastructure. There are plenty of low-cost third party companies that are built to provide those services. As they scale up, they may need to look into building out their own datacenters and work with internet providers to expand bottlenecks.

Parking fines don't really apply to this or you could say large companies get bulk bandwidth rates at lower cost than a smaller company, which would be the same principle.

Perhaps a better analogy is UPS paying to run their trucks at 100mph

 

[Darwin333]

I think if a company can not deliver broadband then the FCC should force the company to lower their rates until they can provide broadband. However, we all know what they will do is protect the mega corporations at expense of everyone else. I don't doubt there are lots of businesses running servers and only paying for commercial service or some fools that run game servers at home and they are eating up a lot of bandwidth. The poor fool sitting at home watching Netflix is the least of their worries. That does not take up any more bandwidth than cable TV.

They get to charge for cable TV separately, and often at a much higher rate than broadband.

They care very much about Netflix which accounts for a full one third of bandwidth usage during prime hours. Just a tad bit more than the "fool" running a game server.

 

[drinkmorejava]

IMO no Controls Engineer would allow this for actual run control. For data/historian items sure, maybe even runtime data to share between plants but actual control? Doubt it. Hell, Industrial is still 10-15 years behind technology wise even in the most progressive of Engineering departments due to hardware being behind.
BTW, you'd need multiple ISPs to rid yourself of single point failure

But the actual question is rather intriguing as to pay for priority.

Not sure anyone would want to do it because of the security considerations, but I had to make up an idea to talk about

Small companies need not build out their own infrastructure. There are plenty of low-cost third party companies that are built to provide those services. As they scale up, they may need to look into building out their own datacenters and work with internet providers to expand bottlenecks.

Parking fines don't really apply to this or you could say large companies get bulk bandwidth rates at lower cost than a smaller company, which would be the same principle.

Perhaps a better analogy is UPS paying to run their trucks at 100mph

Wouldn't it still be cheaper to have a few data centers and the bandwidth you want than to lease servers from someone every 100 miles. Lets say for example that you need 5ms response, that's not practical with any placement of servers. You would need prioritization.

Ahh, but they're both companies paying for the use of public resources that other aren't allowed to use in the same way.