DPI: Drinking the Network Management Kool-Aid
p2pnet view Freedom | P2P | Security:- There are a few arguments being force-fed to the public about DPI and traffic management that I will simply not subscribe to…
This is the core principle in an ongoing propaganda campaign by the providers. It spins the suggestion that internet service networks are somehow being ABUSED by a “rogue, destructive and inconsiderate” segment of their SUBSCRIBER BASE.
The inescapable fact being deliberately overshadowed here is, any inability of a provider to deliver a service *as advertised* would have to have been SELF-CREATED. It was the PROVIDERS that kept advertising “consistent, blinding speeds” and “unlimited everything”, while continuing to take in every subscriber that came in, along with their money. The providers absolutely knew what applications and sites were being developed – any claims that they “simply could not have predicted” their impact and future network demands are nothing but a blatant attempt to insult human intelligence.
And, let’s not forget that providers have also been getting into the content delivery business for themselves for a while now.
Should the amount of service demanded prove to be too difficult for the provider to supply, it becomes a question of doing what is necessary to meet that demand. Either there is the need to stop taking in new subscribers and bring up the level of the service to satisfy the customer base amassed, or start making some major improvements to the entire infrastructure, in order to keep up with the present and future demands.
In either case, the provider would be acknowledging its self-created responsibility to provide what they’ve sold to its customers, and not incriminating the customers who actually use what they paid for, in the manner completely promoted by the provider’s own marketing team. There’s also the added bonus of not pitting customers against each other with false and inappropriate claims.
The bottom line is, Mr. Provider, YOU built it… they came… and you’re still talking their money. The question is, what have you been doing with it, since you chose not to reinvest it in upgrades to your service your customers surely would have expected??
2. It is necessary as well as acceptable to delay “non-time-sensitive services”, such as e-mail, P2P, and FTP.Says who?! Is it “acceptable” that providers be given any authority to determine what is “time-sensitive” in the first place?? How could they be so qualified to make such a decision? People use everything from FTP to P2P to e-mail to chat in order to transfer all sorts of stuff that has either real deadlines attached to it, or simply the personal need for a resolution that nobody else has the right to subvert – certainly not the one you’re paying to make that happen!
Basically, look at what we’re being told here. Protocols used to TRANSFER FILES should be considered “less important” and, therefore, okay to delay, even though we’re talking about a COMPUTER NETWORK?!?
I find that idea completely offensive. And, it lends itself to the question of what kind of traffic a provider would deem “more important”, and deserving of any sort of “priority”?? Would it be the “streaming video” offered either directly from them, or from some “affiliate” or crony? Are they “borrowing” internet resources to support other over-subscribed services they’re involved with, such as VOiP or cellphone activities?
3. DPI will not be used to identify users, or profile their behaviour, and any personal information it collects is not kept. It is merely a tool needed in order to perform effective network management.Like any good sales job, you need to “get your foot in the door”. You need to say something that would convince someone to let you in. Once you’ve got a contract, you’ve done your job, regardless of what lies you’ve told to get it signed, and what harm it does to the one that signed it.
We’re being “sold” DPI in a similar fashion. We’ve got no guarantees on anything being told by these providers who keep pumping it, but we’re just supposed to believe what they tell us, and accept the “fact” that we absolutely “need” SURVEILLANCE EQUIPMENT watching our internet service, and that this needs to be under THEIR CONTROL.
Let’s remind ourselves of just how these providers first attempted to earn our trust on this. First, they throttled us without talking about it to anyone. Then, they denied the whole thing when they were confronted. Then they ‘fessed up, but launched the “bandwidth hogs” bullshit at the same time. Then, we’re confronted with providers wanting to let companies like Phorm and NebuAd target us from their trunk lines, without any regard to what WE thought.
On top of that, we already know that, providers have been preparing to cover their asses in the event that they are held liable for the copyright infringements of their users, thanks to all the “3 Strikes” proposals attempting to worm their way into our lawbooks. Providers have been revising their Terms of Service and Acceptable Usage Policies to reflect their intention to “comply with law enforcement measures”. In order to do that, they would need to know what their subscribers are actually doing, and hand over the appropriate data to either the police or an arm of the MAFIAA, as required.
It’s high time people starting asking some of the questions I’ve put here, not only of their providers, but of their corporate-ass-kissing governments as well, and insisting on the answers. It’s not like we haven’t been given any reason to distrust absolutely everything about this corporately-driven quest for a Police State we see going on all over the world.
Aren’t the “ends” supposed to “justify the means”? Do isolated concerns like “network management” or “copyright infringement” actually justify a massive denial of any basic human right??
If we allow even the least intrusive form of DPI to be installed today, what recourse will we have tomorrow, should it be given more capabilities? We will have accepted any future form of abuse it brings, and handed the keys to our ISPs, who are nothing more than the psychopathic corporations we profess to be protecting ourselves from.
It’s time people starting giving stuff like this a lot more thought. Consider all the feet presently being jammed in your door, and why it might be important to start telling ‘em all to take a hike, and soon!
Devil’s Advocate
..… and identi.ca
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win ~ Mahatma Gandhi
April 7th, 2010 at 11:08 pm
“3. DPI will not be used to identify users, or profile their behaviour, and any personal information it collects is not kept. It is merely a tool needed in order to perform effective network management.”
If that is the case, then why does Bell Canada hire people for marketing to make use of identifying stats web stats, and in the job description they have to “scrub identifying data”?
Do a search for bell job descriptions. Look. Read. See for yourself.
btw, you spelled behaviour wrong, but i copied your error to be polite.
April 7th, 2010 at 11:32 pm
“…you spelled behaviour wrong…”
You Americans never knew how to spell.
April 8th, 2010 at 5:29 pm
One important thing I’ve come to understand in recent years is this… if your ISP is lying to you, ripping you off, abusing your privacy, you should move to an alternative provider immediately (if you can).
That’s why I left Virgin Media (and will never use them again).
As bandwidth grows ever more abundant, the ‘unlimited’ lie will become ever more apparent.
To contrast, ISPs that charge by consumption are not interested in limiting your speed or your consumption (because the more you use, and the quicker you use it, the more you will pay). Paying for resource consumption is fair, and because it is fair, it creates a virtuous circle.
The more you use the more you pay, and (if priced to provide a fair profit) the more cash is available to your ISP to provide for your future needs.
The major UK ISP have utterly lost any sense of long term planning. Virgin and BT seem to be in race to be the first UK ISP to drown in the sewer.
When there are so many good quality respectable smaller ISPs available in the UK, why hesitate?
April 8th, 2010 at 6:53 pm
@Pete:
“Charging by consumption” is also a scam, which could very well be one of the goals behind all the propaganda.
“Consumption” should only apply to depletable resources.
The only way bandwidth becomes depletable is by not offering it.
As far as I’m concerned, these providers are attempting to create a kind of “scarcity” themselves, and offer “heavy consumers” as the culprits for non-existent shortages of bandwidth. Once enough people believe this bullshit, the providers will start charging for consumption, thus allowing everyone to “pay their fair share”. Once everyone is paying for consumption, the providers will have a great time both nickel-and-diming the rates upward, and creating “privilege-by-payment tiers” to their networks.
Charging for consumption might sound fair until you look at the potential for consumer abuse.
I think it would be better for society if the bandwidth was just being provided in the first place, since most of these providers are already enjoying a market of little or no competition.