<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Refocusing Net Neutrality</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.andrewparker.net/2007/05/04/refocusing-net-neutrality/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.andrewparker.net/2007/05/04/refocusing-net-neutrality/</link>
	<description>Tech, Entrepreneurship, and Venture Capital in New York City</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 19:14:06 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Harold Feld</title>
		<link>http://blog.andrewparker.net/2007/05/04/refocusing-net-neutrality/comment-page-1/#comment-55789</link>
		<dc:creator>Harold Feld</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 May 2007 01:54:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.andrewparker.net/2007/05/04/refocusing-net-neutrality/#comment-55789</guid>
		<description>Dude:

Way ahead of you.  The Public Interest Spectrum Coalition is pushing to get 30 MHz auctioned as open access, not just ten.  you can read fairly extensive coverage of this on my blog (www.wetmchine.com/totsf) and the public knowledge policy blog.  Oh yeah, you can also check out my post on this at: http://www.muniwireless.com/article/articleview/5956/1/2

Prior to FCC deregulation in 2005, what we had was open access.  Network neutrality was always the fall back position.  You still need interconnection and common carriage.  But you can forget about a lot of hassles if you can access the underlying essential facility.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dude:</p>
<p>Way ahead of you.  The Public Interest Spectrum Coalition is pushing to get 30 MHz auctioned as open access, not just ten.  you can read fairly extensive coverage of this on my blog (www.wetmchine.com/totsf) and the public knowledge policy blog.  Oh yeah, you can also check out my post on this at: <a href="http://www.muniwireless.com/article/articleview/5956/1/2" rel="nofollow">http://www.muniwireless.com/article/articleview/5956/1/2</a></p>
<p>Prior to FCC deregulation in 2005, what we had was open access.  Network neutrality was always the fall back position.  You still need interconnection and common carriage.  But you can forget about a lot of hassles if you can access the underlying essential facility.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: HOTI75</title>
		<link>http://blog.andrewparker.net/2007/05/04/refocusing-net-neutrality/comment-page-1/#comment-55593</link>
		<dc:creator>HOTI75</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 May 2007 18:58:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.andrewparker.net/2007/05/04/refocusing-net-neutrality/#comment-55593</guid>
		<description>Hello, 

I have been advocating with Hands Off the Internet for awhile now and people are beginning to see the light, or in this case, the cloud net neutrality regulations would create over the infrastructure developments the net needs.  Thanks for your thoughts on the future of music coalition event.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello, </p>
<p>I have been advocating with Hands Off the Internet for awhile now and people are beginning to see the light, or in this case, the cloud net neutrality regulations would create over the infrastructure developments the net needs.  Thanks for your thoughts on the future of music coalition event.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.745 seconds -->
