<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Charlie Angus Net Neutrality bill</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.p2pnet.net/story/16065/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/16065</link>
	<description>p2pnet.net - reader powered</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 04:24:35 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: torrent lover</title>
		<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/16065/comment-page-1#comment-500809</link>
		<dc:creator>torrent lover</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 31 May 2008 01:46:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.p2pnet.net/story/16065#comment-500809</guid>
		<description>Too many wiggle words, not enough punch.

You can bet they&#039;ll argue that blocking P2P traffic is done in accordance with clause 2a.

The bill practically gives the ISPs permission to screw with us.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Too many wiggle words, not enough punch.</p>
<p>You can bet they&#8217;ll argue that blocking P2P traffic is done in accordance with clause 2a.</p>
<p>The bill practically gives the ISPs permission to screw with us.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Reader's Write</title>
		<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/16065/comment-page-1#comment-497655</link>
		<dc:creator>Reader's Write</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2008 14:33:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.p2pnet.net/story/16065#comment-497655</guid>
		<description>Sorry no good they&#039;ll cop out blocking/degrading any traffic they don&#039;t want as &quot;managing&quot; just like comcasts statements. They could even use (3) to dissalow computers running traffic hungry apps as they &quot;substantially degrade the use of the network by other subscribers.&quot;

I&#039;d also be interested how/if VOIP will be affected as the anti-neutrality side claims these apps need proiretized packets for best usage</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry no good they&#8217;ll cop out blocking/degrading any traffic they don&#8217;t want as &#8220;managing&#8221; just like comcasts statements. They could even use (3) to dissalow computers running traffic hungry apps as they &#8220;substantially degrade the use of the network by other subscribers.&#8221;</p>
<p>I&#8217;d also be interested how/if VOIP will be affected as the anti-neutrality side claims these apps need proiretized packets for best usage</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
