Binge On! - And So This is Net Neutrality?

[mike at mtcc.com (Michael Thomas)]

On 11/20/2015 08:16 AM, Scott Brim wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 10:45 AM, Jay Ashworth <jra at baylink.com> wrote:
>> According to:
>>
>>    http://www.engadget.com/2015/11/20/fcc-chairman-gives-t-mobiles-binge-on-the-thumbs-up/
>>
>> Chairman Wheeler thinks that T-mob's new "customers can get uncapped media
>> stream data, but only from the people we like" service called Binge On
>> is pro-competition.
>>
>> My take on this is that the service is *precisely* what Net Neutrality
>> was supposed to prevent -- carriers offering paid fast-lanes to content
>> providers -- and that this is anti-competitive to the sort of "upstart
>> YouTube" entities that NN was supposed to protect...
>>
>> and that *that* is the competition that NN was supposed to protect.
> What I read was that as long as a video offerer marks its traffic and
> is certified in a few other ways, anyone can send video content
> cap-free. No I don't know what the criteria are. Does anyone here? I
> also think I remember that there is no significant cost to
> certification, i.e. this is not a paid fast lane.  If this is all
> true, this doesn't bother me, and could do everyone a favor by getting
> definitions clearer and getting traffic marked.


Why do you need certification? I doubt many people have a problem with 
qos marking,
but "certification" sort of gives me the creeps.

Mike