At ISPCON, the ex-Bell Labs engineer (now prosultant) challenged ISPs to articulate their vision for the future of the internet.

by Alex Goldman ISP-Planet Managing Editor [May 31, 2006]

David Isenberg earned permanent cred when, in his essay "The Rise of the Stupid Network" he told AT&T that they were building the wrong network, that the network of the future would be flexible, changeable, and programmable, unlike the proprietary, closed, and purpose built POTS network. He called the network of the future the "stupid network." It was 1997 and he worked for Bell Labs, who immediately tried to suppress the report (and failed). He now runs an independent, eponymous prosultantcy.

We've heard him at keynotes before (Wi-Fi Planet Keynote: Wi-Fi vs. Telcos) and have attended his conferences, recently renamed Freedom to Connect (F2C).

He said that while the netizens are asking how to change network service provision so that the network can survive, telcos (a group in which he includes cablecos and cellcos) are asking how they can change the internet so that they can survive.

That's because the internet destroys the economics of the old phone company, and as an ex-Bell Labs guy, this is something he understands. In his presentations, Isenberg points out that every aspect of the phone company is subsidized by one application: voice. The internet upsets this because the network delivers IP, over which any application can run. The internet thus separates the phone company from revenue.

Telcos in the U.S. at first liked the internet, back in the dialup days, because people were buying second phone lines. Sales went up, and the telcos invested in their infrastructure to expand capacity.

Then broadband came, and cellular service (which is also often provided by the telco), and households moved back to having one phone line, or even zero.

Now, broadband threatens the economics of their hydraulic despotism, their artificial bandwidth scarcity.

Internet 2.0
While the U.S. telcos continue to deliver speeds far below the OECD norm, the economics of bandwidth changes at gigabit speeds, Isenberg said.

He noted that in recent Congressional testimony [.pdf], Gary R. Bachula, Vice President of Internet2, said, "all research and practical experience supports the idea that bottlenecks can be resolved simply by providing more bandwidth."

Isenberg said that while a content controlling set top box costs about $150, a wide open Gigabit Ethernet card can cost as little as $15.

Isenberg concluded that a high bandwidth and neutral network is less expensive than a carefully rationed network.

Regulation
While the telcos are arguing that net neutrality is a new law that would restrict the internet, Isenberg said the truth is the opposite. "The repeal of regulation is recent, and it is telco-driven," he said.

The original internet, Isenberg said, was designed with an end to end principle, that products and features were added at the edge, that all traffic was passed from one network to another without restriction or alteration. This allows all of the nifty new services, none of which have been invented by telcos.

Isenberg is no fan of the legislative process. He said that once bills move off the floor and enter secret negotiations between House and Senate, the telcos can use their representatives. All he asks of legislation is that it protect our right to experiment. "Net neutrality is a good precaution until we get it figured out."

Q&A
One attendee, Stef Bensi of Outblaze, asked about structural separation. Isenberg replied that although it is a good idea, "telco PR managed to take it off the table even before the 1996 Telecom Act."

After the session, several ISPs spoke to us about the speech (see Related Articles, below).

— End