Network Neutrality vs. Network Management
There is no generally agreed upon definition for Network Neutrality and deviations or violations against the principal. Network neutrality is something of a catch-all phrase that has come to reflect a number of potential behaviours that some have considered to be anticompetitive.Network neutrality implies that all IP packets should be treated more-or-less the equally, and the debate reflects concerns that they might not be in the future - that a network operator might somehow apply different treatment to IP packets (or datagrams) associated with different services, applications, destinations or devices.
Insight: The term network neutrality is a loaded one. It implies that any deviation from its principals is not neutral, and in some way unfair. In many instances, it is perfectly fair to provide preferential treatment to some network uses, say premium customers or emergency services. Well, the highly-paid lobbyists have returned with their own term to redraw the chalk lines on the level playing field. In recent discussions involving the US FCC, the term network management practices has come to take the place of the term network neutrality. While the semantics of this term are more objective, it does not accurately describe the nature of the problem. Network management refers to a much broader scope of activities including business practices, sales and marketing, security, fault tolerance, and capacity planning. Since the issues present in this debate represent only a narrow slice of network management, what term should be used? How about false and deceptive advertising or anticompetitive practices? Somehow that lacks the sexiness of Net Neutrality.