Originally internet was designed not to fail catastrophically like the conventional systems, thereby enabling nations to counter nuclear attacks. Now with the passage of time, the conventional systems also have become capable of carrying internet traffic. This has blurred the line of distinction between services – empowering the fringe players (with little investments) to offer voice, messages etc at a fractional cost than the telecom companies. Hence the telecom operators are no longer able to monetize these (voice, messages etc) in the same manner as they used to in the past – forcing them (the telecom players) to evolve to a new model. While they are in the process, the non-telecom players are becoming increasing concerned. They fear that a telecom player (controlling the network) can unfairly tilt the balance to their disadvantage. Let’s explore the details.
Telecom networks primarily offer two kinds of services. One kind requires a lower latency and therefore the packets carrying these services (like peer to peer voice, video etc) are given preference (prioritized). Whereas the other kind (browsing, email etc) run on a “best-effort” basis, and the packets carrying these are even dropped to make way for the former. Now, if the networks had infinite capacity, it can carry all packets with the lowest latency possible (no prioritization is required). But, the wireless networks practically cannot have infinite capacity and therefore packets of some services have to be prioritized to ensure fidelity. Hence, a wireless network cannot be fully “net neutral”. But the smaller content providers fear that those with deep pockets can get “fast lanes” even within the pipes meant for running packets on a “best-effort” basis, thereby significantly degrading the quality of their services (network capacity being limited). Even the bigger players (with deep pockets) have concerns. They are apprehensive that the telecom operator with ultimate control over the access networks can promote platforms discreetly and push them in slower lanes. Hence, the genesis of the “net neutrality” debate is this fear of the “possibility of misuse” of access networks by the telecom operators for narrow commercial gains. Now having identified the problem, let’s find out what measures are required to enhance the confidence in the stakeholders so that the businesses can function smoothly.
