The FCC Has Rejected The First (Silly) Net Neutrality Complaint The FCC has rejected what was the first (and somewhat silly) major net neutrality complaint. Back in June we noted how Time Warner Cable was the subject of an informal net neutrality complaint by a company by the name of Commercial Network Services (CNS). CNS complained that Time Warner Cable is abusing its dominant market position to reject CNS' request for free peering.

The company runs a series of webcams in the San Diego area it proclaims users can't access if Time Warner Cable doesn't acquiesce to its demands. As promised, CNS has now filed an informal complaint with the FCC, claiming that Time Warner Cable is engaging in "paid prioritization" by simply requiring paid peering. "By refusing to accept the freely available direct route to the edge-provider of the consumers’ choosing, TWC is unnecessarily increasing latency and congestion between the consumer and the edge provider by instead sending traffic through higher latency and routinely congested transit routes," CNS said in its complaint with the FCC. “This is a default on their promise to the BIAS consumer to deliver to the edge and make arrangements as necessary to do that." While ISPs have been repeatedly accused of encouraging congestion to kill settlement-free peering and force content companies like Netflix to pay for direct interconnection, in this case CNS (a smaller operator) appears to be arguing that net neutrality somehow means it's entitled to free peering...just because. As such, it was never never likely that the complaint would be taken seriously by the FCC. And indeed, it wasn't. Apparently the CNS complaint ticket was closed with little fanfare, and the company was informed they should try to hammer out their problems with Time Warner Cable privately. "We regret that you were not satisfied with attempts by FCC staff to facilitate a more satisfactory resolution of the underlying issue," The FCC told CNS. "At this point, you might want to contact the company directly to see if you and the company can arrive at a resolution that is moreacceptable to you. You will receive no further status on your complaint from FCC staff." CNS claims it's going to proceed with a more formal complaint, which will likely be met with the same response. It's a good sign for those who worried that the rules meant big ISPs could somehow be bullied by ever Tom, Dick and Harry looking for free interconnection or prioritization. It's clear the FCC is only looking at the most obvious of ham-fisted abuses. The new rules don't specifically cover interconnection, but the FCC says it will examine complaints on a case-by-case basis. "We deserve free peering just because" isn't likely to cross the FCC's threshold for an argument that constitutes a valid anti-competitive complaint. The new rules don't specifically cover interconnection, but the FCC says it will examine complaints on a case-by-case basis. "We deserve free peering just because" isn't likely to cross the FCC's threshold for an argument that constitutes a valid anti-competitive complaint.







News Jump Charter Relaunches Free 60-day Internet And Wi-Fi Offer; NCTA: FCC Should Stick With 25/3 Speed Threshold; + more news Comcast Shuts Off Internet for Subs Who Were Sold Service Illegally; AT&T, Verizon Team To Stop T-Mobile 5G; + more news California Defends Its Net Neutrality Law; AT&T's Traffic Up 20% Despite Data Traffic Actually Being Down; + more news Are The Comcast-Charter X1 Talks Dead In The Water?; AT&T May Offer Phone Plans With Ads For Discounts; + more news Europe's Top Court: Net Neutrality Rules Bar Zero Rating; ViacomCBS To Rebrand CBS All Access As Paramount+; + more news Verizon To Buy Reseller TracFone For $7B; 5G Not The Competitive Threat To Cable Many Thought It Would Be; + more news MS.Wants Records From AT&T On $300M Project; Google Fiber Outages In Austin, Houston, Other Texan Cities; + more news States With The Biggest Decreases In Speed; AT&T Hopes You'll Forget Its Fight Against Accurate Maps; + more news AT&T's CEO Has A Familiar $olution To US Broadband Woes; EarthLink Files Suit Against Charter; + more news 5G Doesn't Live Up To Hype, AT&T's 5G Slower Than Its 4G; Cord-Cutting Now In 37% of Broadband Households; + more news ---------------------- this week last week most discussed

Most recommended from 25 comments



DocDrew

Try Everything!

Premium Member

join:2009-01-28

SoCal 93.2 20.1

Ubee E31U2V1

Technicolor TC4400

ARRIS TG1672

4 edits 3 recommendations DocDrew Premium Member The informal complaint was already ruled on by the FCC...









His original complaint also failed since CNS doesn't meet the bandwidth, location, or connectivity requirements for TWC settlement free peering. Then in the revised complaint, one of his major examples is 7ms of additional latency to his CNS server in NYC from his home TWC connection in Carlsbad (when his first hop jitter is more than 7ms). He never states how those few extra milliseconds make a real difference to the end user in his complaint though...



Really it seems that he was just trying to get a free direct connect to TWCs network for his CNS so it has better latency to TWC customers and he doesn't have to pay for transit to TWC. Being the CEO of CNS might have something to do with it. Really he should come out and just tell the FCC that his CNS specializes in virtual desktops for "algorithmic FOREX, equities and futures traders" where millisecond latency differences and direct connections to brokers and financial services can make a difference to his clients. That way he can improve his margins and attract more customers.

»www.commercialnetworkser ··· Traders/ said by CNS website : Ultra-low latency trading offers tremendous advantages for the trader because price quotes are received and orders entered before most other traders receive the same quote (usually several times over). This is most valuable during periods of volatile market activity when prices change quickly and latency may affect pricing. Low latency also offers the trader more reliable connectivity to the broker because there are fewer hops on the Internet for potential problems to impact the data transmission, requiring the data packet to be sent again at the expense of time. Review our latency chart. He advertises low latency as a big selling point for his trading customers:

»helpdesk.commercialnetwo ··· ders-vps



Reading the attachments on his CNS helpdesk page about the complaints is rather entertaining. It really shows how he's grasping at straws trying to make a plausible argument without mentioning the primary CNS business:

»helpdesk.commercialnetwo ··· s-vs-twc



The FCC's last statement on the informal complaint is a nice read:

»helpdesk.commercialnetwo ··· 191/6011



[edit] His general policy of free peering when ever possible are starting to cause issues for him:

»www.financemagnates.com/ ··· weekend/ His original complaint also failed since CNS doesn't meet the bandwidth, location, or connectivity requirements for TWC settlement free peering. Then in the revised complaint, one of his major examples is 7ms of additional latency to his CNS server in NYC from his home TWC connection in Carlsbad (when his first hop jitter is more than 7ms). He never states how those few extra milliseconds make a real difference to the end user in his complaint though...Really it seems that he was just trying to get a free direct connect to TWCs network for his CNS so it has better latency to TWC customers and he doesn't have to pay for transit to TWC. Being the CEO of CNS might have something to do with it. Really he should come out and just tell the FCC that his CNS specializes in virtual desktops for "algorithmic FOREX, equities and futures traders" where millisecond latency differences and direct connections to brokers and financial services can make a difference to his clients. That way he can improve his margins and attract more customers.He advertises low latency as a big selling point for his trading customers:Reading the attachments on his CNS helpdesk page about the complaints is rather entertaining. It really shows how he's grasping at straws trying to make a plausible argument without mentioning the primary CNS business:The FCC's last statement on the informal complaint is a nice read:[edit] His general policy of free peering when ever possible are starting to cause issues for him: First he complained about congestion and lack of bandwidth to his CNS (Commercial Network Services) hosted » SunDiegoLive.com website he created, but that didn't get any traction (especially since Cox, Charter, Verizon, Comcast, etc. don't direct peer either and those received the HD videos without a problem or warning). TWC is still being singled out for the non-peering by CNS: