you guys are missing the point. the letter in question doesnt attack cisco, it tells the FCC that the capacity to control access to content ( which we all know QOS is capable off )poses a greater threat if cable is permitted to exert monopoly control over high speed cable modem access. If you only have one ISP which is owned by the cable company and it also co-owns most of the content on the site ( or has some financial interest in it ), there incentive to "discourage" access to the rest of the Internet. Cable has always fought to permit competitive content on its systems and it wants to take that model to the Net. Cisco's only mistake was writing a document that explained how its QoS could be used by cable to discriminate against the Internet content that they do not control.
Slashdot Mirror
you guys are missing the point. the letter in question doesnt attack cisco, it tells the FCC that the capacity to control access to content ( which we all know QOS is capable off )poses a greater threat if cable is permitted to exert monopoly control over high speed cable modem access. If you only have one ISP which is owned by the cable company and it also co-owns most of the content on the site ( or has some financial interest in it ), there incentive to "discourage" access to the rest of the Internet. Cable has always fought to permit competitive content on its systems and it wants to take that model to the Net. Cisco's only mistake was writing a document that explained how its QoS could be used by cable to discriminate against the Internet content that they do not control.