Editing Net neutrality (section)

===Data discrimination===
{{Main|Data discrimination}}
[[Tim Wu]], though a proponent of network neutrality, claims that the current Internet is not neutral as its implementation of [[best effort]] generally favors [[file transfer]] and other non-time-sensitive traffic over real-time communications.<ref name="Wu Neutrality">{{cite journal|author=Wu, Tim|title=Network Neutrality, Broadband Discrimination|journal=Journal of Telecommunications and High Technology Law|volume=2|page=141|year=2003|doi=10.2139/ssrn.388863|ssrn=388863|s2cid=19857168|url=https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2282&context=faculty_scholarship|access-date=24 September 2019|archive-date=23 June 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190623131908/https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2282&context=faculty_scholarship|url-status=live|url-access=subscription}}</ref> Generally, a network which blocks some [[Node (networking)|nodes]] or services for the customers of the network would normally be expected to be less useful to the customers than one that did not. Therefore, for a network to remain significantly non-neutral requires either that the customers not be concerned about the particular non-neutralities or the customers not have any meaningful choice of providers, otherwise they would presumably switch to another provider with fewer restrictions.{{Citation needed|date=December 2008}}

While the network neutrality debate continues, network providers often enter into peering arrangements among themselves. These agreements often stipulate how certain information flows should be treated. In addition, network providers often implement various policies such as blocking of port 25 to prevent insecure systems from serving as spam relays, or other ports commonly used by decentralized music search applications implementing peer-to-peer networking models. They also present terms of service that often include rules about the use of certain applications as part of their contracts with users.{{Citation needed |date=December 2008}} Most consumer Internet providers implement policies like these. The MIT Mantid Port Blocking Measurement Project is a measurement effort to characterize Internet port blocking and potentially discriminatory practices. However, the effect of peering arrangements among network providers are only local to the peers that enter into the arrangements and cannot affect traffic flow outside their scope.{{Citation needed|date=December 2008}}

[[Jon Peha]] from [[Carnegie Mellon University]] believes it is important to create policies that protect users from harmful traffic discrimination while allowing beneficial discrimination. Peha discusses the technologies that enable traffic discrimination, examples of different types of discrimination, and the potential impacts of regulation.<ref name="NN_benefits_risks">{{cite web |url=https://www.dpacket.org/articles/benefits-and-risks-mandating-network-neutrality-and-quest-balanced-policy |title=The Benefits and Risks of Mandating Network Neutrality, and the Quest for a Balanced Policy |access-date=1 January 2007 |author=Jon Peha |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110726003643/https://www.dpacket.org/articles/benefits-and-risks-mandating-network-neutrality-and-quest-balanced-policy |archive-date=26 July 2011}}</ref> Google chairman [[Eric Schmidt]] aligns Google's views on data discrimination with Verizon's: "I want to be clear what we mean by Net neutrality: What we mean is if you have one data type like video, you don't discriminate against one person's video in favor of another. But it's okay to discriminate across different types. So you could prioritize voice over video. And there is general agreement with [[Verizon]] and Google on that issue."<ref name=affe>{{cite news |title= Why Google and Verizon's Net neutrality deal affects you |url= https://money.cnn.com/2010/08/05/technology/google_verizon_net_neutrality_rules/index.htm |date= 5 August 2010 |publisher=[[CNN]] |work= CNNMoney |access-date= 6 August 2010 |first= David |last= Goldman |url-status= live |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20100806124340/http://money.cnn.com/2010/08/05/technology/google_verizon_net_neutrality_rules/index.htm |archive-date= 6 August 2010}}</ref> Echoing similar comments by Schmidt, Google's Chief Internet Evangelist and "father of the Internet", [[Vint Cerf]], says that "it's entirely possible that some applications needs far more latency, like games. Other applications need broadband streaming capability in order to deliver real-time video. Others don't really care as long as they can get the bits there, like e-mail or file transfers and things like that. But it should not be the case that the supplier of the access to the network mediates this on a competitive basis, but you may still have different kinds of service depending on what the requirements are for the different applications."<ref name="ReferenceA">{{cite news |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/innovations/wp/2014/10/10/5-insights-from-vinton-cerf-on-bitcoin-net-neutrality-and-more/ |title=5 insights from Vint Cerf on bitcoin, net neutrality and more |newspaper=[[The Washington Post]]|url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150402123209/http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/innovations/wp/2014/10/10/5-insights-from-vinton-cerf-on-bitcoin-net-neutrality-and-more/ |archive-date=2 April 2015}}</ref>