Part 1
1. Topics that anyone who wants to take a position on Net Neutrality and the current FCC issues should thoroughly understand:
2. History, technology, and economics of backbones, interconnection agreements, peering, CDNs, caching, colocation.
3. Current and future telco and cable business models including capex and opex models, rate caps, cost of capital, return on investment.
4. History, structure, and case law of FCC regulatory framework, including Acts of 1934 and 1996, Title II common carrier rules, et al.
5. Technology and economics of competitive entrants: Google Fiber, mobile carriers LTE & beyond, Wifi & derivatives, and satellites & drones.
6. Technology, economics, and culture of permissionless Internet innovation at each layer of the stack, contrasted vs prior platform regimes.
7. Side note: I don't think I know anyone who understands all of these topics in depth. I know I don't.
Part 2
1. Since people asked, my own "strong views weakly held" personal stance on Net Neutrality:
2. We need to somehow both retain permissionless Internet innovation & telcos ability to get return on capital for network investment.
3. My preferred policy route would center on promoting regulation/deregulation and incentives for more last-mile broadband competition.
4. I see the potential for at least 5-way last-mile broadband competition, at least in non-rural areas:
5. A: cable, B: telco, C: Google Fiber, D: mobile carrier networks LTE & beyond, and E: Wifi and future derivatives.
6. There are a whole bunch of things that could accelerate and enhance C, D, and E. We should identify and do those things asap.
7. One key topic is wireless spectrum; need to get a lot more in the hands of both mobile carriers and into unlicensed cla**ification.
8. Wifi in particular seems underestimated: If a lot more/different spectrum were available, could go much faster & longer range.
9. In addition there are a variety of new ideas including satellites/drones, Steve Perlman's DIDO, etc.; we should warmly embrace those.
10. With sufficient local competition, regulatory pressure much reduced: If one provider plays games, consumers can switch to another.