Of course it's a net neutrality issue. AT&T wants to charge more for data from a tethered computer than it does for a non-tethered computer. Bits are bits: that's the point of net neutrality. If you pretend that "all bits are created equal, but some are more equal than others" (apologies to Orwell), then you're not net-neutral.
No, net neutrality is about not discriminating based on who you are communicating with or the meaning of the bits. For example, if AT&T had a deal to promote Bing, and as part of that blocked or limited traffic to Google, that would be a net neutrality violation (discrimination based on remote endpoint). Or if they detected and throttled VOIP traffic, that too would be a net neutrality violation (discrimination based on the meaning of the bits).
They are discriminating against people who hook up unauthorized computers to their network. That's outside the scope of net neutrality.
AIUI, Net Neutrality can be defined as treating every endpoint the same. My connection to Google, Yahoo and Bing should be exactly the same, as what you said. But does it really matter which device I connect to Google, Yahoo or Bing with? No. My phone is still an endpoint on the internet, as the only difference between a starting point and an ending point is the direction.
You might have a point arguing that bad network users (spammers, zombies and over-consumers) should be discriminated against, but that is not a neutrality rule, since those users did something to degrade the performance of others. Blindly saying that an iPhone is not allowed on my network is exactly the same as saying no one is allowed to connect to Facebook on my network.
In this case though, and especially the Reddit thread early this morning that seemed to spark this debate, users were showing consumption habits of 150GB+ per month on their 3G connection. I have no problem enforcing some restraining rules against them (like throttling over a certain number). But claiming that every packet coming from my laptop tethered to my phone should be charged at a 15% premium compared to the ones that come from my phone directly is ridiculous and is a violation of net neutrality.
Comments
Of course it's a net neutrality issue. AT&T wants to charge more for data from a tethered computer than it does for a non-tethered computer. Bits are bits: that's the point of net neutrality. If you pretend that "all bits are created equal, but some are more equal than others" (apologies to Orwell), then you're not net-neutral.
No, net neutrality is about not discriminating based on who you are communicating with or the meaning of the bits. For example, if AT&T had a deal to promote Bing, and as part of that blocked or limited traffic to Google, that would be a net neutrality violation (discrimination based on remote endpoint). Or if they detected and throttled VOIP traffic, that too would be a net neutrality violation (discrimination based on the meaning of the bits).
They are discriminating against people who hook up unauthorized computers to their network. That's outside the scope of net neutrality.
You are both right.
AIUI, Net Neutrality can be defined as treating every endpoint the same. My connection to Google, Yahoo and Bing should be exactly the same, as what you said. But does it really matter which device I connect to Google, Yahoo or Bing with? No. My phone is still an endpoint on the internet, as the only difference between a starting point and an ending point is the direction.
You might have a point arguing that bad network users (spammers, zombies and over-consumers) should be discriminated against, but that is not a neutrality rule, since those users did something to degrade the performance of others. Blindly saying that an iPhone is not allowed on my network is exactly the same as saying no one is allowed to connect to Facebook on my network.
In this case though, and especially the Reddit thread early this morning that seemed to spark this debate, users were showing consumption habits of 150GB+ per month on their 3G connection. I have no problem enforcing some restraining rules against them (like throttling over a certain number). But claiming that every packet coming from my laptop tethered to my phone should be charged at a 15% premium compared to the ones that come from my phone directly is ridiculous and is a violation of net neutrality.