A group of broadband provider executives were recently interviewed by Light Reading, and the concensus seems to be that P2P, or peer-to-peer, traffic isn't causing a huge logjam in their pipes, yet.

One of the arguments against net neutrality has been the hogging of bandwidth by the legion of P2P users across the country. Qwest Communications International Inc. CTO Pieter Poll cast some doubt on that agrument by saying, "I ... found that the traffic is well under what some in that industry say is happening. I mean, you hear claims of significant double-digit penetration of peer-to-peer traffic, and it was not near there."

The discussions centered on two issues, P2P networks and IPTV services. It's not a coincidence that these terms are thrown together here. The whole net neutrality debate has never been about clogged broadband pipes, free markets or fair practices. The debate has been about competition. Much like third-party VoIP services are a direct competitor to telephone and VoIP offerings from telecom and cable broadband providers, P2P networks are a backdoor competitor to cable and IPTV services. That these executives are admitting that the hype was premature at least where P2P networks are concerned could be a response to the intense heat they've taken on net neutrality.

Luckily, it seems as though this debate will probably be moot for the near future. When SBC Communications Inc. bought AT&T Corp. it pledged last year to uphold the principles of net neutrality until 2007 as a condition of the aquisition, according to this report from Fox News. The story went on to state that analysts believe that pledge will be extended through 2009 to gain approval for the acquisition of BellSouth, which is expected to close next year. Effectively, this should table the discussion on net neutrality. If the biggest player in the broadband game is roped into maintaining net neutrality, no other player in the space will be able to afford to ditch it.

That net neutrality was left out of a new telecommunications reform bill in the U.S. Congress has Internet advocacy groups up in arms. While their points may be valid down the road, I think that for now, the restrictions put on the new AT&T (if the restrictions have teeth) should maintain a free market, which would ensure continued net neutrality through 2007 at least, possibly through 2009. Who knows what the broadband market will look like by then? — Brian Ward

Go to story from Light Reading