In this NPR article there is mentioned 'network neutrality' with very little details on what it actually is or how it actually works. I tried researching it on my own but I get a lot of non-technical explanations of what it is fighting against (essentially metering internet traffic speeds) but I am very confused as to how this works.
My understanding of the internet (broadly) is that user Joe opens up a connection with website npr.com via the HTTP protocol (after some DNS work) which sends and receives data to and from NPR's server utilizing both NPR's and Joe's upload and download speeds.
Where is the throttling occurring? Am I missing a crucial step? Is the 'traffic' being throttled 'on the way' to the client/server somewhat like a tollbooth at the ISP level?
The NPR article brings up the example of how one website could pay to have their traffic go to the user faster. I just don't understand this because isn't all my incoming traffic maxed out at whatever my download speed is? Further, isn't the server maxed out at whatever their upload speed is?
For example, if I try to send 1MB of data from a server (www.mysimplesite.com) with an upload speed of 1MB/s to a client (joe) who has a download speed of 1mb/s would this transfer not happen in the same [theoretical] time as a server (www.thesuperubersite.com) with an upload speed of 2MB/s?
I fail to see how any server can pay to have their content 'reach the user faster' if it is the client who generally is the speed limitation. From a technical perspective, how would this work? I'm also not looking for an analogy or opinions.
Best Answer
Network neutrality effectively governs how providers can handle traffic. It's a broad concept in theory, with potential upsides and downsides in practice. Consensus seems to be the downsides might be fairly harmful to consumers and startups.
In the absence of net neutrality, internet service providers and the big businesses with the budget to support them would win – with consumers and internet startups losing. In theory, abolishing net neutrality would allow ISPs like Verizon to decide for themselves whether or not they want to provide VoIP traffic, or any other traffic type, to traverse their networks. Other Tier 1 providers would be free to do the same.
To be fair, internet in the US isn't currently operated under perfect net neutrality rules. Information freedom is increasingly eroding around the edges of the law, with an egregious, perhaps extortive agreement taking place earlier this year between Netflix and Comcast. Comcast makes up a significant portion of Netflix’s customer base; the video streaming service was all but forced to pay up. This eventually caused Netflix to raise its prices (however slightly), thus, altering their business model and harming consumers. If net neutrality is to fail completely, then expect more deals like this.
As for your question:
When you think of throttling, think of quality of service. Most points of the internet work on the principle of oversubscription, which makes more effective use of infrastructure. So even if you have a 1Gb/s internet connection, you probably won't be getting 1Gb/s service. That's because Tier 1 internet providers' backbones aren’t capable of sustaining 1Gb/s for millions of customers.
A provider has the ability to service packets as they see fit. At micro-scale, imagine you have 2 users connected via a 100Mb connection to separate providers with each provider peering through a 100Mb connection to one another. If either provider decides those users are less important than any other customer they have, they can shape that traffic to be lower priority than anything else, meaning they have the capability of being dropped first if there isn’t enough bandwidth to support them.
It's also important to point out that those packets may not make it to the consumer at all. It is entirely possible to drop packets altogether if they fall outside the threshold those providers provisioned.